Publisher’s Weekly, in early review of my new book, The Elements of Cooking, criticized it for being Francocentric—it should have been called The Elements of French Cooking, the unsigned reviewer wrote, and dismissed its lack of a broader world view (read the review on the amazon page here). I first read this review upon returning from Chicago where I’d attended a weekend celebrating the 20th Anniversary of Charlie Trotter’s eponymous restaurant. Trotter had invited a stellar group of internationally renowned chefs who flew in from across the globe—Pierre Hermé (Paris), Thomas Keller (California), Ferran Adria (Spain), Daniel Boulud (New York), Tetsuya Wakuda (Australia) and England's Heston Blumenthal (photo courtesy of Charlie Trotter's, and that's the excellent David Myers, left, of Sona and Comme Ça in L.A., a veteran of Trotters who was invited in to prepare the canapés at a reception preceding the dinner). At a dinner a couple nights earlier hosted by Trotter, Adria told me that this was a historic occasion, to have this group of chefs together.
Few would deny that on a list of the top ten chefs of the world, these seven chefs have a rightful a place. What was historic, though, Adria said, was that only one of them worked in France (Hermé, perhaps the world's most reknowned patissier).
“Twenty years ago,” I asked, “most of them would be French?”
Adria said, “All of them. Ten years ago.”
This gathering of chefs did indeed represent a fairly global portrait of the chef. Not insignificantly, they’d all arrived to celebrate a chef who had taken the French approach to fine dining and translated it into a distinctly American-global idiom. And perhaps it was no surprise that Arthur Lubow had also flown in for the celebrations, the journalist who four years ago, in an 8,000 word cover story on Adria in The New York Times Sunday Magazine pronounced the death of French Cuisine (the final words of the article are from a Spanish chef: “It's a great shame what has happened in France, because we love the French people and we learned there. Twenty years ago, everybody went to France. Today they go there to learn what not to do.”).
It’s understandable for non-French folks to rejoice at the end of French supremacy in all things cuisine, which has had a pretty good run of, what, half a millennium? The article and the death were embraced with glee, a big raspberry to those old fashioned, jingoistic French farts. The PW reviewer of my book was surely amongst them, implying that something with a French bias was somehow wrong.
I don’t want to make guesses at the reason for this anti-French bias, nor do I mean to imply that an anti-French bias is wrong. Eric Ripert, the Frenchman who co-owns and runs the Michelin three-star, New York Times four-star, restaurant Le Bernardin, told me on numerous occasions how the hidebound nature of the French chef and the culinary mandates of French haute cuisine shut down the imagination and innovation of young chefs. Indeed, it’s unlikely that someone like Adria or Blumenthal or, in the United States, Wylie Dufresne (he did the canapés at a party for the chefs at Trotter’s house) or Grant Achatz, two of this countries most notable practitioners of the avant garde, could come out of such a culture. These chefs are a large part of why the world dining scene has never been more exciting.
But we cannot say that we’re beyond the French, or that the French influence is past and we’re on to newer and better times in the kitchen, that the king is dead and the wall has been torn down. The child, non-French innovators, has not slain the father. The fact is, for whatever historical and sociological reasons, French cuisine became the bedrock of all western cuisine, and more important, it gave us a common language. The language of the kitchen is French-based. Just as, say, English is the language used for communication between international pilots and air traffic controllers.
It was in French kitchens that the fundamentals of cooking were first named and codified. It may be American, but it is called our cuisine. The American chefs who compose our brigades still cut mirepoix as part of their daily mise en place, and the avant garde and cutting edge chefs cook sous vide. And perhaps one of the most celebrated American restaurants ever, The French Laundry, explicitly looks to France for both its inspirations and innovation as well as to the culinary fundamentals that did not begin in France but that were given meaningful terminology there. (I love the above shot of the Francophilic Keller regarding avant gardist Blumenthal's seascape while listening to the sea sounds on the ipod. Chicago Tribune photo by E. Jason Wambsgans; copyright Chicago Tribune.)
In a restaurant culture perpetually seeking the next new thing, we need always remember where we came from and what our common language is. Because if we don’t have a common language, then we have no way of communicating, and we are isolated with our innovations and discoveries, we have no voice.
I wrote my version of Strunk and White for the kitchen in order to name and describe all the terms a cook needs to know in the kitchen, whether that cook is in a home or working grill station on a Saturday night. And yes, it could very well be called The Elements of French Cooking, I suppose—but I would argue with that anonymous reviewer. This is its strength not a weakness. That is why The French Laundry after 13 years remains an innovator in gastronomy. Because Keller, and now Corey Lee and his brigade acknowledge daily a culinary heritage all cooks in the Western world share. Bon Appetit.
ruhlman
I should note that this commentary appeared in a slightly different form in a trade magazine last month.
David
The French, for many years (justifiably) were able to rest on their laurels. But times change and globalization reared its head, and much of the world passed France by. Anyone following the recent presidential election can see how hard it is for anyone to change things in France. I'm not necessarily a fan of all that goofy new stuff people are doing, but on the other hand, some of it is exciting and works well. (Sam Mason comes to mind.) Unfortunately the majority of chefs in Paris think putting food in small glasses is cutting-edge and innovative.
Yawn.
Perhaps there was only one French person at the event because many French people and chefs think that American's all eat at 'McDo' and the food in the US is uniformly terrible. When I worked in a restaurant in the US, a very famous French chef refused to eat there because there wasn't a man at the helm.
I was just sent a French chocolate to taste that was flavored with cumin. It was disgusting and one of the rare times I pulled something chocolate out of my mouth. But in a culture where innovation and success aren't especially celebrated, that's what you get. I stick with confit de canard, camembert, and profiteroles.
Claudia
Hey, we owe the French a great debt, culinarily speaking (even if the French themselves were taught by the Italians). Vive La France, and no apologies needed for being Francocentric. Or even a Francophile. And a few of our favorite French (and half-French) chefs were in action, appropriately enough, at Les Halles the other night:
http://profumoprofondo.com/2007/12/20/bourdain-and-ripert-cook-at-les-halles-joyeux-noel/
TikiPundit
"In a restaurant culture perpetually seeking the next new thing..."
Well, that's half the problem with critics right there.
logicalmin
There are many levels of cooking and many books designed to cater to those levels. It appears that the goal of your book is to educate the entry level cook by placing a vast number of definitions into a single reference. As well as providing a common lexicon to those in the industry.
As for french cooking becoming archaic, I couldn't agree more. I don't think many cooks even realize how different the avant garde chefs are from the every day cook. The techniques of the avant garde chef are vastly different nowadays. It is possible to combine many ingredients in unusual ways. With ever increasing numbers of textures. Cooks of the future will no longer say "Give me a tablespoon of blonde roux", They will say "this puree has a ph of 7, give me the xanthan gum".
JD
I'm probably about to create a shitstorm, but I strongly disagree with you, logicalmin. While the mol. gas. community of pH and purees and hydrocolloids is quite exciting and tasty, I do not see it as a new foundation of cuisine.
The reason that Michael's book can be called "Francocentric" is because one can take the bedrock principles found in French cuisine and apply it to almost anything else. It is a foundation with limitless possibilities. Just because there are techniques from French cuisine does not limit one to preparing the heavy, old-guard dishes of yore.
breadchick
Hear, Hear!!
Kay
Well, realistically, how many more ways do you think you would have been drawn and quartered if you had attempted to speak authoritatively on the subject of fugu preparation or provided "your family's" secret recipe for kimchi?
kevin
Michael,
Well said.
Vinotas
I agree with JD.
The reason French cooking techniques became world-reknowned was because they are bedrock principles from which many other types of cooking can spring (even molecular gastronomy, which, while fun and interesting, is IMHO a short-term and very limited phenomenon). The beauty of French cuisine's elements is that it can please the everyman (eg, duck confit) as well as the high-end customer (eg, complicated sauces, etc...).
Now, that being said, I do agree that the current attitude in French cooking as well as society does not lend itself to innovation and experimentation. Many of my friends have moved to the US and the UK to escape this stifling climate. It's too bad, and hopefully Sarko will manage to change things without too many strikes.
Disclaimer: I am part French, but my palate is quite worldly, and I'll eat/drink pretty much anything (and have).
Mike
Put it this way, while I love French food and other European cuisines, I still really enjoy Asian cuisines and find they don't always get their just due - from Japanese to Korean to Thai to especially Vietnamese.
That said, I'm guessing that not many people realize that the much-loved bowl of Pho actually has its origins in the French influence on Vietnamese cuisine during the colonial days...
http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/chronicle/archive/1997/11/05/FD48543.DTL
So, perhaps the French culinary influence goes beyond just Western cuisine.
logicalmind
Vinotas Said:
"The beauty of French cuisine's elements is that it can please the everyman (eg, duck confit) as well as the high-end customer (eg, complicated sauces, etc...)."
I guess this is where the confusion lies. Why could one not create duck confit using modern techniques rather than the old way? For example, you could prepare duck confit sous vide.
I am also not clear on how you could have more complicated sauces than by using mg products and techniques. From hollandaise that is nearly impossible to separate(or even fry it like at WD-50) to combinations of ingredients that could never go together in a traditional way.
These techniques are not mainstream, but in 10 years we may see things differently.
Andy
Whether or not French cuisine was, is, or should be the foundation of Western cuisine is not a valid criticism of the book. The argument the reviewer makes would be akin to criticizing a book called "The Elements of Music" by saying "it has too many Italian terms."
bcarter3
"Indeed, it’s unlikely that someone like Adria or Blumenthal or, in the United States, Wylie Dufresne (he did the canapés at a party for the chefs at Trotter’s house) or Grant Achatz, two of this countries most notable practitioners of the avant garde."
You might want to have another go at that sentence.
Steve G.
Odd that virtually every author with a blog that I read mentions at some point that Publisher's Weekly reviewed their book either out of context or with a pre-set agenda (be it politics, humor, history... it doesn't seem to matter).
To be honest I know nothing about PW except that it tends to publish useless reviews -- not bad, but actually useless for making buying decisions -- of a lot of good books. The trend continues, I guess.
tb
It isn't entitled "The Elements of Western Cooking", it's called "The Elements of Cooking", period. That's kind of like our "World Series". I get the reasons why they're called what they are called, but they show, in fact, a very limited world view. How can you call representatives from 4 countries "a fairly global portrait of the chef" unless we're working with a very narrow definition of a chef?
P.S.
The first person who uses the word "ethnic" gets a giant raspberry blown in their direction.
EK
I think it's close-minded since the French did provide the fundamentals to cuisine, as you write, and now future chefs jump off from that point. Half the English language has its roots based in French. What were you supposed to do? Invent a new language of cooking? That wouldn't be the "fundamentals", then.
Tags
Mon dieu! Has it come to this?
http://www.theonion.com/content/node/28022
Tags
BTW, it's funny you should mention that, Andy.
Bob DelGrosso's "Elements of Opera" was promised best-seller status if he would just get rid of one letter then add another to the title.
doodad
I am the same age as you Michael. I grew up with a Mom who did indeed try some of Julia's lessons, but for the most part French cuisine was viewed in my child's eyes as heavy, fussy, and made by a fat, fussy chef who you could imitate with a stereotypical accent.
I ignored French cuisine, and indeed France, and studied other favorites. But, as I got better at cooking, I realized I knew nothing of the true basics, terms and techniques. This led me to revisit what I did not know and see that I was ignorant.
Thanks to the internet, I have been able to interact with so many people and so much information that my world view has changed. You, (oddly) the program Chef, Ramsay and TB can take a large amount of credit in that. Why the French don't suck indeed.
PS I see a present shaped just like Elements under the tree for me from my wife. Yes!
Hank
I am just now reading your book, Michael, (and liking it, BTW) and I must reluctantly agree with your decision to go French. I mostly do Mediterranean food and have pretty much rejected the cooking of Le Guide or Pepin for the dishes of Crete or Puglia or Galicia.
BUT, in the Western World, it is the French and no other county that has spent so many lives' work thinking seriously about food, writing those thoughts down, teaching them to others and hammering out detail. I adore Italian food, but its beauty doesn't lie in the technical or the scientific. Add French technique (your word is 'finesse') and you can elevate Italian food - if you don't crop its ears and make it too stuffy, which happens.
I do agree with tb's criticism about "Elements'" Eurocentric orientation, though. The Japanese and Chinese think just as hard about high-end food, and their technique and finesse can exceed that of the best French chef. Some of it it truly breathtaking in a way European food never is. Personally, I liken Vietnamese food to Italian and Japanese to French.
Has anyone tried to take the bedrock principles of high-end Chinese or Japanese food and applied it to the home cook? I reckon that'd be every bit as valuable as "Elements."
Juliette
I think it would have been more accurate to title it "The Elements of French Cooking".
If for no other reason than the current implied comparison with what Strunk and White achieved is completely misleading.
The book (which, btw, I bought) has its good points, true. But in no way does it do for cooking what Strunk and White did for writing.
I think the critics who point this out are exactly right.
William Fincher
I'm currently a student in culinary school in Charleston SC. Charleston has a really cool culinary scene and alot of great chefs. Stage at any of those restaurants (save, the proto-typical asian places) and you had better know your french terms, you better know how to make stock, you better understand whats happening when you make hollandaise,or you might just get stuck cutting mirepoix all day. Bottom line, french techniques still are very important to alot of the worlds top restaurants. I'd also be willing to bet even the hippest-foam-slinging chefs started their careers using classical french techniques.
Skawt
I am shocked, SHOCKED I tell you, to discover that the phrase "cheese-eating surrender monkeys" has yet to grace this thread.
Vincent
As I sit here, drinking the last of a shit bottle of merlot (but free) that a vendor dropped off as a Christmas gift today, I contemplate a few things.
First is that a culinary student named William signed his first and last name stating that he would be "stuck" prepping mirepoix all day. If Santa Claus is reading this he will fill said prep in William's duties until he can't move his fingers. My preps and sous' have knives that are surely older than he is.
Second is the Asian aspect that a few people posted on - it would be tremendous to have the intricate demonstrate in book form that the French and Italians have left us from years past. To date I have read some, but in Asia, esp Japan, they hold the rights to the food they bring as an ultimate...it seems almost religious to their culture which is their right. Southeast Asian cuisine has become more prevalent in the US but has so many ties to European countries it is another topic all together. From what I understand, you can get a better baguette in Vietnam than in Paris (total bullshit, IMO).
And C (told you I was at the bottom of a shit merlot):
Michael Ruhlman - the book is great. It's no Feast of Sunlight, but...
Jealousy aside (always wanted to be a writer, damnit) you have written a book that will educate people in the proper way to cook - not chef, but cook. The fundamentals that you have given are essential to proper technique.
Back to topic - there is no food uneaten. We are all recreating our ancestry - be it veg, protien, etc. Nothing we are doing is new, just different. It's just nice to have new ways to do it.
Vincent
Reading my last post I realise that I had not one point on topic. Sorry - it was the shit wine but now I have scotch.
French Chefs are great. All Chefs are great - we learn from each other.
Maybe trying to create a "seascape" with an IPOD doesn't work. It would'nt work for me. Making something happen in London that should happen in france might be a bad deal. I don't want the Cote in Manhattan.
Scotch talking now - haha
ZenKimchi
I remember on listening to the lecture series "History of the English Language," that the words "beef", "pork," and "venison," and other more common words that even non-chefs use come from French.
William Fincher
Don't worry vincent, santa has granted me the privellege of cuting mirepoix for what seemed like an eternity. I'm unfortunantly older than the average culinary student apparently the average age of the culinary student is dropping rapidly. Algebra has proven my biggest foe though. It was actually Ruhlmans "Making of a chef" that helped me make the decession to go to culinary school, it's been more fun than i thought it would be but i had to make alot of sacrifices. Back on topic, no one can deny the effect that french tecniques have on cooking, today, tomorrow and yesterday.
faustianbargain
sorry ruhlman..no matter how you slice and dice it, this one sucked. good luck with the next book. think outside the box and all that...know what i mean?
simon
The French are the Yankees of cooking. They didn't invent the game, but they sure did master it, and modernize it, and while others have had glory recently, they will never catch up and equal the success and heritage of French cooking. And dont doubt for a second that the French have some more wins in their future. What it comes down to is just straight up player hating. The French get hated on a lot, but it's mostly jealousy. The French certainly dont hold the patent on arrogance and chauvinism either. How many female sushi chefs have you ever seen in your lifetime?
ntsc
Publisher's Weekly is written for the trade. When my wife still traveled in books, it was a weekly journal in our house, paid for by the publishing company she worked for.
It has a reputation in the trade for its reviews having almost the same relevance to the book being reviewd as those in the New York Times book review.
That is none to speak of.
Tags
And don't forget the French Yankees, AKA the Montreal Canadiens.
nondiregol
Despite the fact that I think Charlie Trotter should be frog marched down Michigan Avenue for his crimes against American foie gras, and the fact that most of my cooking background is Italian, I'll throw in with the surrender monkeys here. Sure Caterina de Medici brought that culinary innovation the fork to France when she married Henry II (I suppose today a Queen would come with her ISI foam whipper)but basically the French wrote it down.
Back to Michael's point; French is the "lingua franca" of the cooking world. In a different era it was also the language of diplomacy, contributing words like "detente" and so on.
Meanwhile Rachael Ray is busy rewriting Escoffier as the short hand of the American home kitchen. What a state of affairs. "Sammy" anyone? It's "yum-o." Is there an eligible monarch we can marry her off to?
Kirk
Strunk and White didn't titled their book "The Elements of English Style" or even "Elements of American Style". Much of their book pertaining to grammar and usage is useful only to writers of the English language but a lot of the guide, perhaps the most subjective elements, are universally applicable to good, clear writing in almost any language since the topic is style, not grammar. Great style without good grammar, though not necessarily formal grammar, is unthinkable.
Same applies to Ruhlman's Elements. Grammar is the fundamentals of any school/language of cooking. Style is finesse.
I was rereading Escoffier's introduction to Le Guide Culinaire and was struck by his humility that this now classic tome was probably already outdated by time of publication. He knew that techniques changed and improved, better ways of creating classics and new combinations to form innovative dishes were the norm. He did not consider his collection the final word on cooking yet he maintained and demanded high standards. The followers should not adhere too strictly to orthodoxy the founder never intended.
Kal
I agree with Kirk's comment!
Also, I suppose this is slightly off-topic -- but then again, is bacon *ever* off-topic? Thought you and your readers would enjoy the following:
http://www.beerorkid.com/wp-content/uploads/2007/11/bacon-_flowchart.jpg
faustianbargain
for the person who wants to frog march charlie trotter for 'crimes against foie gras': pray do tell..what crimes did he commit?
and where exactly did you read about it?
Nathalie
LOL... Rachael Ray rewriting Escoffier, Yum-o!
The best laugh I've had all day.
Mr. Ruhlman, I'm disapointed at how vexed you appear to be with this review. The opinions clearly point to a serious lack of culinary knowledge.
You continue to provide such unique insights into the craft. Don't worry about it....
Claudia
Brief digression, momentarily:
No, Caterina de Medici did not bring the fork to France upon her marriage to Henri II, nodiregol - it was invented by the Venetians. But she did bring fashion, food, apothecaries (the legendary lavender fields of Provence were planted to supply her apothecaries and perfumers), etc., to the French Court. Probably the first cookbook in Europe was De honest voluptate e vulturine (On Honest Pleasures and Good Health), published in Latin in Venice in 1475, and written by Patina, a scholar, humanist and the Vatican librarian. The role of healthy eating and a good diet was intrinsically tied with the practice of apothecaries - who were the medieval precursor of medics, pharmacists, dieticians and nutritionists, if you will. It's fascinating to me (whose earliest known ancestor was an Italian Renaissance apothecary) how closely tied the preparation, preserving and cooking of food (and the optimizing of its maximum healthful benefits)is with the practice of the apothecaries, and how profound an impact Caterina had on both food, perfume and holistic healing even today, just by bringing her cooks, etc., over from the Florentine court.
Vincent
Good God do I want to sit down and have drinks with Claudia. Nice post.
Jehaine
This sort of debate sort of mirrors what I once felt like when I took a cooking basics class with a local cooking school. I grew up predominately on home-cooked Korean food. I took a cooking class series over summer break for fun. The most valuable lessons I learned were knife techniques and making stock. The classes were interesting. However, for the most part, I didn't find it useful or inspirational to me. Buerre Blanc? Mirepoix (onion, carrots, celery)? Poached Pears in Wine? Pate? These were foods and terms that I could care less about because these were dishes I had no interest in making at home. I think I really wanted to improve on flavoring and preparing the Korean dishes that I had come to love and grew up on. I am just like any other American who wants to improve or learn how to make the comfort foods that they had come to love from their childhood.
My point is that French cooking style or fundamentals based on French cuisine wasn't really that inspirational to me as far as teaching me the basics. That language of cooking wasn't what I grew up with. So as I finished my cooking class series with a roomful of students of mostly European-heritage people, I felt a little bit like an outsider being exposed to a new food culture. Sauces finished with butter. Soups enriched with cream. These were dishes I never ate, although they sounded delicious. However, as part of the diet that I grew up with? To me...these were unimportant and I could live without them. But that doesn't mean that nowadays, I'm not willing to try to make then. Just like the average European-heritage cook wants to try to make stir-fry Chinese.
nondiregol
"for the person who wants to frog march charlie trotter for 'crimes against foie gras': pray do tell..what crimes did he commit?"
Trotter's crime was single handedly getting foie gras banned from Chicago restaurants. Dick.
This put him at sword point with fellow Chicago chef Rick Tramonto of Tru. I guess it get's down to whose alderman has more juice.
Trotter's partner in dickdom, Puck has followed along. Apparently Wolfie had to surrender his testacles when he was airlifted out of Austria and now he feels sorry for geese and ducks. Except that he's probably roasting a goose for Christmas.
Paula Wolfert made the comment, "I'd rather be a force fed duck than a Zacky chicken."
Mathias Eichler
Wow, inspirating conversation.
Claudia - great insight.
Nondiregol - Trotter was responsible for the Chicago debacle - I'm surprised the other chefs showed up to his birthday...
About cultural cooking:
I'm from Germany and I also find myself most comfortable cooking German dishes. Just received as Xmas gifts two amazing German cookbooks, unfortuantely, for non-germans, they're written in German.
But there's a big food revival going on in Germany as well.
I think Michael's book is great for what it is, but the question is, if it comes at a good time. Michelin just gave Tokjo dozens of Stars, all over the world people are taking their "ethnic" cusine and rediscover it, and appreciate it in a new way and with that elevate it to new heights.
It's time for a new chapter in food. The French, without question pathed the way for us to see food/talk about food the way we do today.
But the times are changing and looking into Haute Cusine of other countries and cultures will be the challenge, responsiblity and ultimately success of the Chef of the next generation.
How great would it be if we could get "food inspiration" (be it cook books, food reads, magazines etc.) from other countries, cultures points of view...
I'm off to have some Glühwein and German Christmas cookies.
Elizabeth
Very interesting comments about nationality and the demographics of the photograph of some of today's most revered chefs!
They're not all European and American either, though there is now a decidedly Anglophilic edge when it comes to the dominant language of the nations represented. Some day these changes may become even more noticeable, perhaps as chefs move further away from variations on classic French cuisine, as our notions of great dining and great restaurants shift, and as economic and political factors transform the demographics of those who dine in the world's best restaurants.
I wonder how many decades away we are from seeing three or four women in as selective a group as this.
* * *
N.B. Usually Byzantium is given credit for the use of forks by diners, though the origins may go back even further in the Greco-Roman heritage of the great medieval empire. (Venice's ties to Byzantium are legion, thus the fork's journey to the West.) For Platina's primary source, cf. the earlier *Libro de Arte Coquinaria* by Maestro Martino of Como. There are two fairly recent editions of the text translated into English, the book from The University of California Press with a scholarly introduction that places the 15th-century book in its historical context. The name of the famous Parisian restaurant, Taillievent, pays homage to an even earlier, 14th-century French chef and author of recipes found in a number of manuscripts edited by Terence Scully. I wouldn't argue for the primacy of either French or Italian cuisine on the basis of this information.
faustianbargain
nondiregol..you said..
"Trotter's crime was single handedly getting foie gras banned from Chicago restaurants. Dick.
This put him at sword point with fellow Chicago chef Rick Tramonto of Tru. I guess it get's down to whose alderman has more juice."
really? single handedly, you say? what or who is your source? surely, you must have a timeline or something? a direct quote from trotter supporting a foie gras ban...something? anything?
i didnt think so.
Elizabeth
Erratum: "Taillevent".
nondiregol
For Faustianbargain:http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0504070058apr07,1,5263303.story?coll=chi-news-hed
Here's your quote.
faustianbargain
to nondiregol: i have read that. which part of it suggests..and please allow me to quote you..
"Trotter's crime was single handedly getting foie gras banned from Chicago restaurants. Dick.
This put him at sword point with fellow Chicago chef Rick Tramonto of Tru. I guess it get's down to whose alderman has more juice."
"single handedly" seriously..which part of that link convinced you of that..a timeline of events will prove that you were wrong.
chicago tribune has conveniently removed the original 'charlie trotter debacle' page from march 29, 2005 altho' the april 5th version of it(your link) is still online.
try this instead on egullet forums:
http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?s=d59e5af9f9ba411dd388675821b17307&showtopic=64581
until of course, they try to pull that one down. they are known for stunts like that. if they do, let me know..i have the entire trotter mud smearing fest(sponsored and hatched by bourdain's bony arse) in my files somewhere.
nondiregol
More foie fu: http://www.csmonitor.com/2005/1213/p01s04-ussc.html
The alderman involved probably had a role in passing obscenity laws. "I can't define what's obscene, but I know it when I see it." Or, "I've never been to Paris, but I know what it smells like." Apparently he does read the Tribune, or maybe he has people for that. Some vegan staffer might have picked up on it for him: "Boss, save the ducks. I've tasted foie gras and it tastes like Karl Rove's underpants."
Now if pig livers were being banned in Chicago there would really be a fight.
Trotter also carries the misfortune of bearing an uncomfortable resemblance to Karl Rove.
Frances Davey
I watched Ratatoulle last night for the first time, and I wish to thank Mr. Ruhlman for Reach of a Chef and Elements, without which I would have been entirely lost in that wonderfully animated kitchen. It was kind of cool to recognize names from both the CG world and the culinary world in the credits.
faustianbargain
to nondiregol: obviously, you are more familiar with karl rove's edible underpants. i am not going to waste this precious space(and my time) to discuss the scents and tastes of male lingerie.
i shall now take leave from this commentary forum with the satisfaction of knowing that regardless of whether or not you'd admit to committing a libel fart regarding trotter's 'singlehanded' contribution to the ban of foie gras in chicago, you(and others) KNOW that it is nothing more than second hand verbal garbage by people who have nothing better to do with their time and surplus malice. happy wanking!
Claudia
Faust, Why don't we just term Trotter's efforts to get foie banned in Chicago as "determined" or "leading" and not split hairs over "singlehanded"? And Elizabeth - you are quite correct in your scholarship - forks WERE probably used earlier, by the Romans - but I was talking about their larger introduction to Europe by the Venetians. (The Italians kept a lot of good stuff to themselves for centuries, instinctively knowing those Cheese Eating Surrender Monkeys would just up and co-opt their ideas. You know . . . like with pate? Aromatherapy? Cuisine in general? (!!) (OK, this is just a little pre-Yuletide snark, gang!)
Vincent - drinks anytime! How's that caja working out?
faustianbargain
claudia: that wont do because trotter has nothing to do with getting foie gras banned in chicago or anywhere. in fact, he went on record saying that he is against it. his decision was to not serve it in his own restaurant.
thats a long way from 'singlehandedly' banning foie gras or expending energy in a 'determined' or 'leading' manner to ban foie gras.
what i'd like to know is why there is so much misinformation, lies and fabrication of facts about his involvement in the banning of foie gras when there was, in fact, no effort on his part. or wolfgang puck.
except for the disturbing fact that all this generates drama and 'creates' a villain(or a hero whose rallying cries 'protects' the rights of foie gras lovers), what is the purpose of this histrionics? because falsely accusing someone or getting a hard on by knocking someone's reputation is certainly not going to contribute anything towards a reversal of the abomination that is the legislation of our tastebuds.
this is the most idiotic..and conniving too...strategy ever employed by anyone who wants a restoration of rights. idiotic. anyone who continues along these lines run the risk of becoming a caricature of the 'ignorant and clueless american'. spare us the laughs and giggles...there is enough of that going around due to other idiots.
Elizabeth
Claudia: I wanted to stress the debt Western Europe owes to Byzantium since the medieval civilization is not well known in the United States where the adjective "Byzantine" has negative connotations. We should also give thanks to Arabs who established early medieval courts in Sicily and Spain for their contributions to the cuisines we revere today. La storia e sempre complicata, e secondo me, la gente chi mangia i formaggi e simpatica almeno che si chiama Claude e non Claudio!
Kalyne
The problem with "Elements" is that equating French cooking with cooking skills/techniques in general is very dated, and (surprisingly) culturally very insular.
Nothing wrong with learning and using French techniques--or acknowledging the debt certain other styles of cooking have to the French. However, by ignoring a variety of international ingredients and techniques that are so important for many modern kitchens, the book falls far short of its goal--to be a definitive reference.
As for Strunk & White--no, their book doesn't apply equally to writing in other languages and they never intended it to. Their scope was small and specific--to give concise tips for improving written (American) English.
Ruhlman would have been better served to define his "Wlements of" goals in a similarly modest way....
FoodPuta
Oh this is just great Mr. Ruhlman!
I go to all this effort to learn a few French cooking techniques, then come to find out I missed that memo that said French cuisine isn't cool anymore.
Now I have to go back to calling my croque monsieur a grilled cheese with gravy again.
can I get a refund?
Vincent
faustianbargain...no doubt some people have gotten some info from the papers and the web, as in articles like this one:
http://www.chicagotribune.com/news/local/chi-0504070058apr07,1,5263303.story?coll=chi-news-hed
Whether or not he actually feels one way or another about force feeding is lost in most of the articles. Bourdain has some writings on egullet as well on the same topic. And if a chef decides not to serve goose liver (or any product for that matter) I don't see how that ((or any comment regarding actual press)) makes any difference. Maybe that person's point was that Trotter has a HUGE voice on the subject and his actions will cause others to follow for no other reason but to be like him.
Kaylne...I disagree on most points of your post. There is nothing really dated about French cooking - they are actually still cooking to this day! The skills and techniques provided in Elements as well as many others over the years are a base to expand culinary knowledge. The techniques haven't changed because cows and pigs haven't changed (much) - vegetables are still vegetables and a good stock is still a good stock. You still break down a chicken the same way. It's a base to set your kitchen correctly, a way into expanding your culinary knowledge. It seems easy to say that the fundamentals aren't needed but they are for most. You seem to have knowledge of food and I get that, but the title of the book isn't "The Elements of Global Cooking" or "Stock up on ponzu and a good amount of Abalone." As for modern kitchens, ingredients and techniques - we all know the major 3 they came from and are just expanding from what they offered us.
Claudia - anytime you are in the Dallas area drinks are on me. The caja is FREAKING AWSOME!! I actually helped one of my stewards make one out of an old Dr. Pepper cooler this week. It took some tweaking - the cooler was actually WAY too hot with the coals on top so we adjusted after the 1st two burned paletas. My neighbors are sure to taste the crispiest pork skin in 2 days! Sour oranges didn't hold up - I'll make my own mojo.
Merry Christmas everyone!
kanani
Pahhh!
Last year, my writer & editor friends and I were going through the reviews at PW. We felt they couldn't be seen as "the standard," and that it was a pity that Amazon puts so much weight on their opinion by listing it first. Because many are as picky and biased as any amateur blog entry. Some are incredibly shrill, others downright pretentious. This isn't to say that one can thumb their nose at PW but perhaps it's more valid to look at those who've said good things, which includes Alton Brown and Jacques Pepin.
Besides, I know of no perfect book. A writer writes the best book he or she can often over a period of years. Sure, you could've put wok, udon, tamari in there, even ghee, and chapathi but you didn't. Who cares? You focused on what you thought was essential from your POV.You provided a knowlegable and engaging read. People who read it will be that much smarter. So be it.
And Merry Christmas!
faustianbargain
regardless, it is a downright lie that trotter was 'singlehandedly'(determined or leading)responsible for the foie gras debacle in chicago. the timeline proves that the entire namecalling started AFTER the ban..when mark caro tried to incite the two chefs into a verbal war..and asking them how they felt about the ban..and playing uninvited messenger boy between them...ricky.t called trotter a hypocrite and trotter threw back a few choice(and admittedly unfortunate) words at his one time kitchen staff.
in the meantime, mischiefmakers and gossip mongers(and attention seekers..you know who you are) did what comes naturally to them. this doesnt make their stories A FACT.
but then again, this is the land where fox tv delivers "news". and this is afterall only food industry gossip. lets face it..wars are fought without checking facts...in the bigger picture, this doesnt matter. yet..for what it is worth..a lie is a lie. and a fact is still a fact.
that trotter wasnt serving foie gras was not even common knowledge..much less news..before mark caro who usually writes for the entertainment section decided to make it 'more interesting'. of course..other 'entertainers' followed.
the entire crowd talking shit about trotter(and puck) are looking entirely foolish and impotent. stop it. i understand that gossip is essentially incestual newsreporting..that does not transform fantastical lies into facts.
shuna fish lydon
Well at least one thing can always be counted on, no matter how many years go by:
They are all men, still.
Bob delGrosso
nondiregol
Trotter's decision to not sell foie gras certainly gave much courage and credibility to the enemy, but he's hardly directly responsible for having it banned.
He did not lobby the quislings in city council or make TV commercials for PETA. But much in the manner of a President who comes out for a god while he's in office, he became indirectly responsible for the conversion of those who were overawed by the authority of his position.
I still think he deserves to called out on his stand against freedom of choice, and take some responsibility for the damage he has done to the farmers who produce foie gras. But he is not one of the primary villains here.
truenorthern
French cooking is the bedrock on which western cuisine is built. Full stop.
Train cooks in the classics and they can cook anything. Saying French cooking is dated is lie saying classical music is dated. It's true it's familiar and one knows what's coming; the joy is how a particular chef (and conductor) arrives there.
Juliette
re: foie. Personally, I applaud Charlie Trotter for acting on his conscience and not letting himself be intimidated by peer pressure.
Conforming with the majority is always easiest. I admire him for standing on principle (a refreshingly different principle than "It's good to do simply because I like to eat it!")
Tags
Charlie Trotter's decision to stop serving foie is all about peer pressure.
The people who defend the humane practice of raising fowl for foie gras are in the unenviable position of arguing for something most people are easily misled about. Misled by zealots whose misguided antics are embraced by the news organizations.
If anything, Charlie caved.
Frances Davey
Merry Christmas Michael and all!
faustianbargain
to tags:
caved? peer pressure? i think the real pressure is from chefs who want to keep foie gras on their menus and want charlie trotter's backing...and certain ex-chefs who will stoop to any level for shits and giggles.
faustianbargain
to bob delgrosso: charlie trotter's stand isnt against freedom of choice. how can it be? he didnt even announce the absence of foie gras in his menu until mark caro made an entertainment piece out of it for chicago tribune. he chose not to serve foie gras...and what damage did he do to the 'farmers'? what is it? sonoma, hudson valley and another one whose name slips my memory..these are hardly 'farmers'..they are businessmen selling an overpriced luxury item..essentially a monopoly...its still a capitalist society. they can quit if it cant put porridge on their tables and pick another product to sell. its not like they are harvesting tomatoes and beans from their 1/4 acre plot and someone ruined their lives..some perspective, please.
Tags
Caved, as in, used to sell it,
checked the weathervane in the (much larger and less well-informed) non-chef community,
stopped selling it.
Tags
You asked for perspective, you got it.
All the foie producers in the world combined couldn't even dot one of the "i"s in Smithfield.
If you want to plead courage of convictions, tilt at THAT windmill.
luis
Well said Ruhlman. Cooking needs a common language that is universally understood. French is fine since they have perfected such language. I have no problem with it. I know of nobody lining up to buy xantham gum or any particular reason they should. The basic kitchen oven is the most versatile multitasker and indispensable appliance in the kitchen. Microwave ovens fall a mile short of replacing it. The immersion blender is another niche gadget destined for industrial high volume unitasking processes.
Flavor comes from a lot of things, mostly from the fat you are cooking in. Maybe you can throw in a slice of fat back into that plastic envelope you put in the immersion blender? but it seems like a very bland process. All the geeks on Iron chef look ridiculous and their dishes look as un apetizing as anything Bourdain eats in his tour.(When is that guy going to cook something worth eating?). The point is, you can push the envelope up or down and just getting noticed isn't necessarily a good thing. To make a nationalistic review out your "Elements of Cooking" is not helpful. The book sets out to help everyone communicate better in the kitchen and that is a good thing. I was over at Mariane Esposito's web page looking over her christmas recipes and they are so Italian that I passed on them. Hard core ethnic cuisine requires a trained palate and is an acquired taste. (Tell that to that psycho chef Bourdain...). In the end everything we eat is American.. whether it originated in Thailand or Italy. What we are ultimatelly left with is a common language to assimilate such cuisines and make them our own.
faustianbargain
i dont get the weathervane references..but i am sure you meant it to sound impresssive.
i dont know...if someone 'used' to be a burglar...can he not be reformed? if someone 'used' to be a liar...is he doomed to be one for the rest of his life? if someone 'used' to be ignorant, is there a justifiable reason to remain benighted?
some of us abseil...some of us crash and burn...and still some of us choose to hang ourselves..
re perspective...all the foie gras 'farmers' in the world cant compare to smithfield? perspective is knowing how many people in the world can afford foie gras compared to the number of people who can afford "quality" smithfield products?
what does smithfield got to do with anything anyways...good grief! getting across a point is like swimming in a sea of treacle.
sfchin
Faustian-
The problem, I think, is that the majority of the regular readers of this blog long ago made up their minds that foie gras is not only natural and humane, but in fact that it is the paragon of humane animal care and should somehow be the model upon which all farming practices should be based. The knee-jerk reaction to anyone who appears to be against foie gras is that they are either misinformed, ignorant, or have an ulterior motive of promoting universal veganism.
I have attempted in the past on this and other blogs to argue that foie gras is not only unnatural but also likely the product of a severe pathologic disease process. Alas, my comments have fallen on deaf ears (blind eyes?). The counterarguments invariably fall into one of two categories: 1) foie gras is natural since waterfowl fatten up before migration, and 2) factory farming is the big evil. Number 1 is just plain wrong, and number 2 is pointless. Attempting to engage in logical debate about this subject has only led to frustration, so I have stopped trying. Sad, but true.
Tags
SB - I'm sure I'd impress people by telling them that a weathervane shows which way the wind blows.
Used to, as in, used to stand up for the humane small farmers who make foie (pre-cave days)
SFC - "foie gras is natural since waterfowl fatten up before migration" is only wrong when you twist the facts. In the real world, nobody but PETA propagandists would argue against the statement that waterfowl not only fatten, but gorge themselves prior to migrating. Some might not know that they eat long pointy-spined fish, but I don't mind... I can explain that.
"Factory farming is evil" - just because you miss the point of contrasting small, humane farmers against large, soulless corporate farmers doesn't make it pointless.
sfchin
Tags, I am afraid that it is you who have the facts twisted. Mulards are non-migratory, being a sterile hybrid of the Muscovy and the domestic duck (descended from the Mallard). The Muscovy is nonmigratory, and some wild populations of Mallards migrate while others do not. Even in other species that do consistently migrate, they do not expand their livers to anywhere near the degree seen in foie gras. Foie gras simply is not a "naturally occurring" phenomenon. Of course, most domesticated livestock are also not "naturally occurring" animals either, but let us not fool ourselves by pretending that the pre-migratory gorging of wild waterfowl is any sort of justification for the production of foie gras.
Also (and entirely beside the point), while certain species of carnivorous ducks like the Merganser do eat large fish, the Muscovy and the Mallard are dabbling ducks, meaning that they eat by skimming vegetation and the occasional insect or other invertebrate off the surface of the water. While I have never argued that the process of gavage is painful or stressful to the ducks, it is (obviously) a completely unnatural way of feeding a duck.
faustianbargain
tags, english is not my first language. and i remain unimpressed.
sfchin: but you should never stop trying!
for example..we heard tags say:
"In the real world, nobody but PETA propagandists would argue against the statement that waterfowl not only fatten, but gorge themselves prior to migrating."
which translates to me as 'sterile hybrid ducks gorging themselves is natural'...which makes me wonder...why mulard ducks? why not geese as it originally was..the answer is because the hybrid ducks are more resistant to disease and stress. geese are notoriously difficult to raise...ask any europeon farmer. in other words, the very existence of foie gras is based on the profits they bring and not because it is 'natural'. it is one thing to derive foie gras as a natural by product and totally another to breed sterile hybrid birds by the thousands....manually force feed them rather than waiting till they gorge themselves to fatten their livers.year around foie gras production is also not natural...waterfowls migrate and have breeding seasons. of course...cant expect that out of sterile hybrid ducks!! tags, of course, will say that it is "natural".
here is my point, sfchin..i believe in people. i believe in the freedom of choice. i also believe in free markets. what i dont believe in is the false packaging and lies and propaganda of the foie gras industry. somehow i think that if they didnt pepper 'natural' all over their product, it wouldnt sell. thinking and any single celled organism with the ability to read can see how 'natural' foie gras really is...this continual dumbing down of the consumer by lying would be hilarious if it werent so pathetic and embarassing.
this is much like the discussion about the title of ruhlman's book...french cuisine is awesome, but there is more to other world cuisines. i think of french cooking as a well organised template that can be applied to other cuisines, but the french canon is not so inclusive as to define all cooking.
foie gras as fattened goose liver may have been 'natural' at some point. it is not so anymore. just because its origins are natural, we cant assign that myth to include the foie gras of the 20th century.
i suspect there is still some shame in this world when one is recognised as someone who consumes cruelly produced and humanly/connivingly manipulated food. hence the lies to launder the glaring flaws of modern foie gras production. its not like a fully stuffed, naturally engorged goose fell from the air mid-migration and we said.."oh shucks! i'll have me some natural foie gras this xmas. hallelujah!!"...our foie gras, its different, innit? hence the apologist, revisionist verbiage. that gives me hope. which is why you cant stop trying.
Tags
"the majority of the regular readers of this blog long ago made up their minds that foie gras is not only natural and humane, but in fact that it is the paragon of humane animal care and should somehow be the model upon which all farming practices should be based."
Then "I have attempted in the past on this and other blogs to argue that foie gras is not only unnatural but also likely the product of a severe pathologic disease process. Alas, my comments have fallen on deaf ears (blind eyes?)."
Perhaps you might consider tuning your arguments. Picking on the most arcane and trivial word in my post, migratory, you proceeded to build a "case" against a natural characteristic of ducks, hybrid or otherwise.
Somehow, the true-believer in you couldn't resist mentioning that mulard "mules" were only in existence because of the profit potential for three small-scale foie producers in North America. Of course, that is pure Goosesteppo propaganda, ignoring that ducks cross-breed in the wild when opportunity knocks.
I don't much blame you for trying to take the easy way out. Smithfield, Tyson, and ConAgra are hard targets with vast resources. You are right to be wary of dealing with such cunning and ruthless adversaries.
But don't attack people trying to make a living, not just for themselves but for their employees, with egregiously specious quarrels.
And you don't wear the nit-picking well, either.
luis
Right foie grass.... ad nausseum.. Basically garbage in garbage out applies here. Pork fat rules not liver fat. A niche fat is like any other niche anything.. It's appeal is to the few and not to the many. That is no reason to elevate it above its unnatural production means. How would anyone enjoy getting a tube shoved down their throats every day and fed crap? Then the grand finale is just as bad. Disrespect the bird and pay the price. Just like the recent plagues on animal stock being fed crap...dead carcasses of diseased animals. In nature and in business there is no such thing as a win lose. Eat it at your own risk.
Tags
Actually, the foie birds are respected a lot more than factory-farmed chickens, notwithstanding what the goosesteppo agitprop machine propagates.
Again, unnatural is a loaded word, and in this case, misleading. Ducks gorge themselves naturally, migratory or stationary, straight or hybrid. Often they gorge themselves with long-spiked fish that, like a feeding tube, does not trigger a gag reflex because they don't have a gag reflex.
Myself, I've only tried foie once, and it wasn't even pure foie, but a pate made from it. It was nothing special to me. Meat now makes up a much smaller part of my diet, thanks to Michael Pollan and Peter Kaminsky. What I do eat, I get either kosher or organic. I have nothing against vegetarians or vegans, though I'm not above teasing them from time to time.
The book I enjoyed reading the most was by Sy Montgomery, a vegetarian who raised a pig with her Jewish husband (Howard) and called the book she wrote about it "the good good pig, the extraordinary life of christopher hogwood."
What I do have an issue with is people that jump on a bandwagon to outlaw or intimidate small farmers who probably employ more people than the mechanized factory farms.
ntsc
Claudia
you wrote: "No, Caterina de Medici did not bring the fork to France upon her marriage to Henri II, nodiregol - it was invented by the Venetians. But she did bring fashion, food, apothecaries (the legendary lavender fields of Provence were planted to supply her apothecaries and perfumers), etc., to the French Court. Probably the first cookbook in Europe was De honest voluptate e vulturine (On Honest Pleasures and Good Health), published in Latin in Venice in 1475, and written by Patina, a scholar, humanist and the Vatican librarian.
snip"
two of the cookbooks I got for Xmas list the first cookbook as by Apicius the Roman epicure. One says it is still extant (Sausage book by Aidells). I belive a copy to be owned by the proprietar of the resturant Des Artistes in NYC.
Tags
Last but not least, the decline of the popularity of French cooking coincides with the rise of the popularity of Rachel, Paula, Aunt Sandy, and Emeril.
Whether it's lovemaking or cooking, the French bring a refinement that can only come from patient attention to craft. Like the musclecars you could buy for $10,000 ten years ago, French cooking and service skills will rebound and be more popular (and more valuable) in a little while.
Food service skills, I mean.
ntsc
I use this only as one of many examples:
"which translates to me as 'sterile hybrid ducks gorging themselves is natural'...which makes me wonder...why mulard ducks? why not geese as it originally was..the answer is because the hybrid ducks are more resistant to disease and stress. geese are notoriously difficult to raise...ask any europeon farmer."
there seems to be a very faustian problem with food that is not 'natural'.
I point out that most beef comes from corn fed steers, neither corn feeding nor steers are 'natural'. The corn feeding, if done properly results in a better tasting beef, and the steer is easier to handle. Both adding value to the producer. Corn fed young bull, by the way is tastier but a lot harder to produce.
'Goose fat rules' Cry often heard echoing down the basement corridor outside Garde Mange I at CIA.
Tags
If you feed corn to a cow or bull, there's a good chance they won't survive. Not only does it cause an enormous amount of gas, but a lack of the ruminant's normal diet of grasses will cause complications including but not limited to decreased immune function.
Taste? Mostly, that depends on what you've been conditioned to eat. This Is the age of Rachael Ray, and Ritz Crackers, Duncan Hines, and Dunkin Donuts are the preferred tastes.
luis
Tags, I have to agree with your last comment. I over reacted a bit at the discussion which took such a wrong turn from the original post by Ruhlman. Thinking folks like yourself and many others agree with going organic and cutting back on red meat a bit.
Foie gras is a niche ingredient and as such I don't really consider it significant. Really if you enjoy it then fine.
In the new year I plan to explore more sauces and techniques for vegetables and fish. In 06 I tried using the microwave more but gave up after I learned first hand that regardless of the microwave itself cooking times depend on the quantity, arrangement(temperament if you will) and mass of what you are cooking. So unless you camp out next to the micro and take baby steps you are likely to be extremelly dissapointed by its results. One thing is to know something is not done and quite another is to understand why such thing should not be done.
I love the slow cooker for a hands off braises and soups. I look forward to using the pressure cooker much more next year for quicker meals and tastier grains and beans and vegetarian dishes. All very very healthy stuff. Of course I use the steamer a lot. I think it would be easy to go vegetarian if one wished, healthy too. Thanks for the book references. Right now if I was to guess the percentage of recipes in my database that are protein-less, I'd say maybe 20-40%. I will code in a subcategory to track this information. Something to think about... I break down my ingredient lists into proteins, veggies-legumes and Herbs and/or spices.
Claudia
NTSC:
Notice the use of the word "PROBABLY one of the first cookbooks". There are doubtlessly older ones, but Patina's was one of the first to enjoy widespread dissemination in Europe, and to have its recipes and general theory about cuisine and health set down, formally. (I hesitatwe to use the word "codified.")
ntsc
Claudia
I did notice that, I just found it an odd coincidence to have noticed what you said, and within a few hours to be given two books that take cookbooks back 1500 more years.
No offense intended.
Claudia
No offense taken, N - and enjoy sitting down and read those those ancient texts. What a blast! It's still interesting to note that, no matter who produced the first one, they all came out of Italy - either through the Romans, initially, andlater through northern and central Italians (like Platina, Martino, etc.)
Your books must be quite beautiful - and fragile. What a treasure.
ntsc
Sorry, my post can be read that way, but they are modern cookbooks (Sausage making and Bacon) that make reference to a Roman cookbook.
Somebody who will go nameless go me into sausage making.
I believe I've seen a copy, but the owner didn't let anyone else handle it as it was the prize of his collection.
Nic Heckett
Corn-fed beef is not a better flavor. It is a blander flavor, that many Americans have grown to prefer over grass-fed. Grass-fed is much more complex in taste. IMHO.
Steven Morehead
First, why are we still having this Trotter-foie gras debate. Isn't it a little like kicking a dead horse (which some of you don't like because it is cruel, and the rest of us don't like because it tastes bad!!!) Both sides need to chill out. Judge Trotter on what he does choose to cook, a reasonable person could say "this mousse de foie gras that Trotter served without the foie needs foie, but we they can also say thank you for not putting foie in my ice cream!!" Can we all just get along.
Second,logicalmind, why cook confit sous vide? How would that make it BETTER/DIFFERENT? Would you leave out the cure and give us all botulism and a different taste? Or maybe leave out the duck fat and therefor the "classical" flavor? Or maybe the attraction is the fancy name or the little plastic baggy. Or it that you want to make use of that vacuum machine and your thermal circulator that you paid through the nose to get. Maybe you should read about confit in "Charcutrie." I don't mean to sound mean, but the idea "sous vide confit" and confit are so so similar I just don't see the advantage. The only advantage that I see is that you would not lose any of the moisture, but then you would not have the concentrated jelly to make salad dressing out of. If you are suggesting something different than "sous vide confit" why not call it something different? Would you do it at like rare so you could keep the color/texture, why is that better? This is where a good understanding of the French fundamentals comes in handy. How do you know where you are going if you don't know where you have been? Ruhlman's point is that at wd-50 they are still calling what they are making "hollandaise" even though it is not "classic." Part of the reason that Escoffier is important, and that many people forget, is his role in changing French food. For his day he was a progressive. So I don't think change is bad, but change things to make them better not just different.
ntsc
Nic
If you are talking factory beef, I agree with you. The steer was taken from his mother too soon, taken out of the pasture too soon and is being fed too much corn at an age it makes him sick, so he gets dosed with anti-biotics.
On the other hand if you are talking about essentially hand raised beef from a small farmer that is 'finished' for the last few weeks before slaughter with corn and no hormones and anti-biotics. I think that tastes better than grass fed.
In the 70s my then wife and I used to buy a quarter, as needed, from a friend who farmed that way, and it was in a different league than anything I've ever gotten from a butcher or super-market. The best steak I ever remember was from his son's 4H project.
cathelou
Fork fans, you should check out Tim Mooe's quirky and hilarious The Grand Tour. In it he traces the route taken by Thomas Coryate, who supposedly brought the fork from Venice to England in 1608.
http://www.amazon.com/gp/product/0312300476/ref=cm_cr_pr_product_top
All this suggests the fork did indeed come from Venice--but I wouldn't call this in-depth research either.
faustianbargain
to morehead: like i said in paul levy's latest in guardian(http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/food/2007/12/a_traditional_christmas.html), i didnt start this. yet, i cannot walk by without poking at the weak lies and misc. floating pieces of secondhand fairytales about foie gras that is allowed here.
Tags
I blame nondiregol for beating a dead horse to resurrection.
At this point Meatlesstopheles with the Faustian Blinders felt compelled to begin a "dialogue." FB can always be counted on to join a discussion so she can unload on Bourdain, who makes life miserable by clearly demonstrating the folly of PETA's anti-foie campaign, most recently on his holiday No Reservations.
I have to take some of the blame, taking the reins of our equine Lazarus and riding him into a pissing contest for which there is no discernible "winner."
Claudia
Faust, your link above is dead - was this the article?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/travel/2007/dec/23/christmas2007
Tags
or this one
http://blogs.guardian.co.uk/food/2007/12/a_traditional_christmas.html
(w/o the apostrophe and parentheses)
Nic Heckett
ntsc - I suppose it is a matter of personal taste. I grew up in Ireland, where corn does not grow well (before the new strains that grow in cooler temps), but grass does. That is the taste of beef that I knew, and when I had grass-fed in the US for the first time, I realized how I missed that taste. Similar to barley finished pork, which is the taste I remember from my childhood. In the end, we all yearn for those tastes of childhood, which is why cuisine is the last aspect of the "Old Country" to disappear from our lives. A third generation Polish-American and a third generation Italian-American may be identical in their culture in every respect but the food they yearn to eat, the food from Grandma's kitchen.
mike pardus
Two points....
1)Steve Morehead: A cure which would inhibit botulism would contain nitirates or nitirites - neither of which are common (but not unheard of either) in duck confit and would make the duck taste like pastrami - not like duck
2)All of the anti-foie folks: If you are completly vegan and use no animal products because of an ethical stance, I can't argue with you. You're right and I'm right....my atheism does not invalidate your belief in god or vice versa.
But if you consume meat and have not visited BOTH a Foster Farms poultry plant AND Hudson Valley Foie Gras and seen the difference with your own eyes, you should remove yourself from the discussion - you are not well informed enough to have a valid opinion about what constitutes humane animal husbandry and what does not.
See DelGrosso's Blog for details and photos of HVFG at
http://ahungerartist.bobdelgrosso.com/search/label/foie%20gras
faustianbargain
to mike pardus: wrt your point #2, can i wear my pink panties with an upside down mr.spock splitting his fingers on the first tuesday of every even numbered month? i ask because its important that i get your approval first!!! it means a great deal to me that you approve, you see...
to tags: i'll stop when bourdain does a show on animal welfare, participates in a protest or two, stop talking through his arse, does a vegetarian food show(the tasty kind..) and starts volunteering at PETA.
faustianbargain
p.s. crap..my comment to mike pardus was rude. if i have one rule in the blogworld, it is that i'd never to be rude to anyone older than my mother.
the sentiment remains. my apologies for the delivery of it.
Steven Morehead
I understand that a cure with sodium nitrite would kill the botulism and affect the taste. The point I was trying to make is that traditional duck confit is cured duck legs (with plain old sodium and maybe some other flavor, like black pepper for your "pastrami" taste) poached in duck fat at between 170 and 180F and left to cool in the fat. If you are really lucky the next step is to leave it in your seller for some time to ripen. You can use salt because the duck will be in the temp/lack of oxygen/PH trifecta for less time than it takes to develop botulism. Read up on the production of prosciutto di Parma or other salt cured magical wonders for a better understanding of salt. Pastrami by the way is made from brined (with pink salt) brisket flavored with black pepper, coriander and SMOKE. Maybe if you were eating that corn-fed pastrrami it might taste something kind-of resembling duck confit, but I doubt it. I was really trying to find out how sous vide confit is better because if you followed all the same steps as I outlined I don't see how you would get a different result and therefor something better. If anyone out there knows PLEASE correct me I really want to know so I can make some at my future restaurant (but probably not). And if you changed something so basic as the cure, the fat, or the temperature why not call it something different so I can have my beloved confit left alone.
Steven Morehead
Dear Faust, I think I did a reasonably good job at DEFENDING Trotter's point of view. I'm reminded of a story I heard about, of all things, Star Wars and George Lukas. During the production of Ep. 4 the Screen Actors Guild almost stopped the movie from being released because he would not put all of the applicable credits at the beginning. What resulted was the battleship coming out of no ware, and me falling out of my seat!!! I wanted that couple of minutes of information that no one understands to prepare myself for the rest of the movie. Also if he had skipped that first shot and started with the "along time ago..." it would have reminded me with a middle school sex ed tape I saw once.
Steven Morehead
P.S.
sometimes you NEED Foie (the credits) and sometimes you don't (Star Wars)
I'm sorry some duck might be getting hurt somewhere maybe. Then again I think the moonshine in my cupboard makes up for it.
mike pardus
Steve- You said "Would you leave out the cure and give us all botulism and a different taste? " .....which led me to believe that you associate the flavor of confit with the inhibition of botulism. The flavor of pastrami lies primarily in the nitrites and smoke, not the pepper - I could just as well used canadian bacon as an example. You seem to have a good knowledge of these things, excuse my assumption otherwise. I have found that Paula Wolfert's recipe - calling for temp of 190F - works really well.
BTW - for those who do not have your background - "Confit" means to preserve. Not only duck in it's fat, but goose, pork, and other proteins...also, anything else by other means - "confiture de frambois" would be "raspberry preserves" in English; and candied orange peel would also be refered to as "confit".
FB - I don't know you, you don't know me. It should go without saying that you don't need anyones approval to hold your beliefs...I only suggest that you observe first hand before you close your mind and attempt to sway others. If you have observed, I respect your right to have a dramatically different opinon than I and will ask for your well informed opinion to debate mine and try to change it. If you have not, then I reserve the right to call you on being uninformed. Please don't make this personal...not in MR's house.
parkbench
Dang, been gone for a couple of days and missed (and will skip most of) the usual foie gras debate. Meh.
More worrisome was a conversation at my mother's dinner table. She was very upset that her annual Honeybaked ham did not have the usual sugary crunchy glaze, which seemed instead to have broken down in a mass of goop at the bottom of the bag it came in. Hey, mom likes Honeybaked -- and there is no debate in her house. Commentary and advice from me is not welcomed at a time like this.
However, my brother had a not very helpful suggestion: Next year, let's get a Smithfield ham! They TORCH the glaze on! I chose not to expound upon Smithfield pork at the dinner table, for reasons you all know.
Oh, no. I will, right now, begin seeking out and saving up for next year's holiday ham and force it upon the family if necessary.
Happy new year to my fellow Ruhlmanistas.
--parkbench
faustianbargain
to mike pardus: i have been doing this for a while now and i have no interest in converting foie gras lovers to some kind of anti-foie gras brigade.
if you are going to 'defend' foie gras, let it be with facts. it doesnt do well to maim the names of the chefs who have chosen to remove foie gras from their menus. like trotter and puck and others have done.
yet...i seldom hear a voice of reason defending foie gras. the only reason to oppose the ban of foie gras should be that the govt does not have the right to legislate the food choices of its people. it shouldnt be about vegans or vegetarians or trotter or puck or whomever. and i oppose the ban of foie gras. i dont support the methods of its production, but i do oppose the ban of a product.
i see a web of PR efforts launched to promote foie gras. sonoma with their artisan(tm) foie gras and hudson..well..you get the idea. it is quite obvious and their efforts are transparent...frankly, it amuses me. however.. it would do the PR companies well to silence the shrill voices that we hear in the webworld about foie gras.
it is ridiculous to bring up battery chickens everytime(which you did with your first comment to me) foie gras is criticised. the logic of the argument is appalling. while on one hand, people frown upon battery chicken and cow hell, there is another parallel prose in stilted language that claims that 'foie gras ducks' live a better life than 'battery chicken'.
how can the breeding of sterile ducks that never migrate be "natural"? of course not..foie gras is NOT the 'natural' byproduct of raising poultry. not if it comes from ducks that are bred in barns and fed in sheds. i am not going to explain how i judge those who eat battery chicken or foie gras, but the former is a budget issue and the latter one of hedonism/tastebuds. while the former is shamed, the latter is feted as a gourmet. i call bullshit on this.
even if foie gras production is broadcast to the entire eating public of this world in the most honest way, it will still not earn a lot of support. why? simply because only a small percentage of the population can stomach what is being fattened for them. it is best to accept this and move on to one's foie gras course rather than try to beat down those who refuse to eat what is unnatural and cruel for them.
to shame those who express beliefs of compassion to animals and choose to be vegans/vegetarians is a travesty. to glorify the consumption of meat with dubious justifications of a duck's wellbeing in a foie farm and comparing its life to that of a battery cage chicken is perverse. to spread lies about chefs like trotter who refuse to toe some kind of cheffy line of obedience is simply cheap and tacky.
when you stand shoulder to shoulder with those who rely on libel to defend the consumption of foie gras, your argument is diluted with lies.
when bourdain shows the foie gras farm footage on television, it holds very little credibility because this is a person who has rabidly defended foie gras and ruthlessly insulted those with eating habits different from his own. in my opinion, he is no different from animal rights activists who rely on shocking publicity stunts to drive home a point.
when bob delgrosso puts up a video on his blog, it holds very little value considering the other nasty things has had to say about vegans, vegetarians and animal rights activist earlier in the very same blog. and when you appear with him, you are tainted by the shadow of his words and verbal histrionics.
on the other hand, there is derrick(of obsessionwithfood blog) and another person whose name slips my memory but his blog is in blogspot and he goes by the handle, "drvino" who present a pretty objective view of their visits to the foie gras farms. but here is the deal, these people report and dont try to dictate 'who' has to think 'what' to come to their personal food decision....you are guilty of that too, i am afraid.
when michael ruhlman trashes vegans in an manner that is undignified and unbecoming of a decent person, his opinion on foie gras is biased.
and then there is the group of headbangers who amplify and spread some very virulently unpleasant biases against those who dont support foie gras.
and yes, this is ruhlman's house and i am sure he knows how to block me if he wants to..afterall, this blog is his face and i am sure he is very well aware of what is being allowed to be visible. altho' frankly, as he doesnt have a problem with trotter or puck being called names, i am guessing he shouldnt have a problem with someone defending them.
to morehead: some of us are ok with the lack of opening credits...as were most of us with godfather and citizen kane before star wars ep.4.
eventually(especially after a new hope), many movies did away with the opening credits. it didnt ruin the movies..crappy story lines and acid tripping editing did, but the lack of opening credits is yet to kill a movie. i support the right of directors who choose to run the opening credits and i doubt if anyone would boycott a movie because of the lack of opening credit or if he becomes a 'terrible' movie because of it.
Tags
FB - Don't stop, keep going. People need to see the kind of logic that drives PETA et ilk. You do a fine job of showing what happens when emotions take control and throw a temper tantrum.
That is my guess as to why MR allows this to proceed. Like any tantrum, it spends itself but leaves a reminder of why one needs to struggle with one's initial urges.
mike pardus
Some comments on FB's post above:
"if you are going to 'defend' foie gras, let it be with facts"
-The fact is that I have seen foie production and commercial poultry production. Foie production is more humane -period. Judging by your response, may we assume that you have not? If you have seen both and would like to discuss how you come to an alternative opinion I will listen.
"it doesnt do well to maim the names of the chefs who have chosen to remove foie gras from their menus"
- I have re-read my posts. I have not maimed anyone's name or derided their choices.
"It shouldnt be about vegans or vegetarians or trotter or puck or whomever. and i oppose the ban of foie gras. i dont support the methods of its production"
- The only reason I find acceptable to oppose foie production is if you are morally opposed to killing all animals for food - I can't argue with your morality, but I think it's reasonable for you to accept that mine is different.
"it is ridiculous to bring up battery chickens everytime(which you did with your first comment to me) foie gras is criticised. the logic of the argument is appalling. while on one hand, people frown upon battery chicken and cow hell, there is another parallel prose in stilted language that claims that 'foie gras ducks' live a better life than 'battery chicken'."
- Again, if you are opposed to all animal husbandry for human consumption, I can't tell you that you are wrong - just different from me. On the otherhand, if you accept that animals die for our food - and if you consume them yourself- how is it poor logic to point out that while most animals are tortured before slaughter, foie ducks are treated respectfully?The logical conclusion, therefore, is that the support of foie production is the support of humane treatment of animals. To accept factory production but advocate against foie is to advocate against humane animal husbandry. If you can dispassionately expain how this is flawed logic, I will listen.
"how can the breeding of sterile ducks that never migrate be "natural"? of course not..foie gras is NOT the 'natural' byproduct of raising poultry"
-No animal husbandry is "natural"...hunting and gathering is "natural". Domestication of plants and animals developed so that you and I could have time discussing issues like this instead of tracking wild birds in the snow.
"not if it comes from ducks that are bred in barns and fed in sheds"
- all commercial poultry is raised indoors, how does this make foie different/worse than others?
" i am not going to explain how i judge those who eat battery chicken or foie gras but the former is a budget issue and the latter one of hedonism/tastebuds while the former is shamed, the latter is feted as a gourmet. i call bullshit on this"
- I hope that I am not giving anyone the impression that I have the right to judge anyone else, but your comfort in placing yourself in judgement is another issue altogether. The false economy of factory produced food is becoming more apparent every day. To eat 99 cent/# poultry is an extreme and historically unprecedented luxury which is unlikely to be sustainable for much longer. That virtually every home in the US has 2 television sets and highspeed internet access, that every teenager - regardless of househld income - has a multi-media cell phone is a direct function of the torture of billions of factory raised animals supplying cheap protein to everyone. I prefer to spend my money on good tasting food raised humanely, others prefer to pay less for cruely raised animals and buy toys. Where's the bullshit now?
"even if foie gras production is broadcast to the entire eating public of this world in the most honest way, it will still not earn a lot of support. why? simply because only a small percentage of the population can stomach what is being fattened for them"
- I have watched self professed omnivores faint at the sight and smell of factory processing and seen the same people - the very same individuals - enjoy and learn from a visit to a foie farm. If both processes were broadcast side by side the stomachs would be turning toward foie gras.
"to shame those who express beliefs of compassion to animals and choose to be vegans/vegetarians is a travesty"
- My comments in past posts will show that I have complete respect for a vegan's beliefs and accept their right to express them, I only ask for similar respect and acceptance. Please point specifically to the travesty I am guilty of.
" to glorify the consumption of meat with dubious justifications of a duck's wellbeing in a foie farm and comparing its life to that of a battery cage chicken is perverse"
- Perverse? How so? See above on accecptance of animals as food and relative cruelty.
" to spread lies about chefs like trotter who refuse to toe some kind of cheffy line of obedience is simply cheap and tacky"
- I have clearly not lied about anyone, nor - looking back at what I have written - do I find my behavior here cheap or tacky. Again, please point to specific examples so that I can be more self aware.
"when you stand shoulder to shoulder with those who rely on libel to defend the consumption of foie gras, your argument is diluted with lies"
- I have stood shoulder to shoulder with no one here, I have merely suggested that in order to be credible in this debate one should either have a firm moral position on consuming animals at all OR have first hand experiance observing methods of production.
"when bourdain shows the foie gras farm footage on television, it holds very little credibility because this is a person who has rabidly defended foie gras and ruthlessly insulted those with eating habits different from his own. in my opinion, he is no different from animal rights activists who rely on shocking publicity stunts to drive home a point"
- I can understand how you can feel this way. Anthony makes his living being extreme. Those of us who agree with him find him amusing, those who do not usually find him appalling.
"when bob delgrosso puts up a video on his blog, it holds very little value considering the other nasty things has had to say about vegans, vegetarians and animal rights activist earlier in the very same blog. and when you appear with him, you are tainted by the shadow of his words and verbal histrionics"
- Robert, on the other hand is a usually very thoughtful and tempered - he certainly does his homework and knows what he's talking about. I have not read everything he has written here, but if I'm to be "tainted", I'm ok being so with DelGrosso's words. I find your use of the word "histrionics" in this context ironic and amusing.
" these people report and dont try to dictate 'who' has to think 'what' to come to their personal food decision...you are guilty of that too, i am afraid"
- I have not dictated to anyone what they should think or how to come to personal decisions. I have offered the opinion that people engaging in public debate should be as well informed as possible and suggested that those who are not should become more informed before entering the discussion.
"when michael ruhlman trashes vegans in an manner that is undignified and unbecoming of a decent person, his opinion on foie gras is biased"
- And the part about "pink panties on altenate months" and the personal reference to my age qualifies you to declare who maintains dignity and decency? And sets the tone of your argument as unbiased? Once again, your logic eludes me.
"and yes, this is ruhlman's house and i am sure he knows how to block me if he wants to..afterall, this blog is his face and i am sure he is very well aware of what is being allowed to be visible. altho' frankly, as he doesnt have a problem with trotter or puck being called names, i am guessing he shouldnt have a problem with someone defending them"
- My comment was directed to you out of respect for my friend's site. I will especially not respond - in my friend's house - to your personal jabs. If I am indeed older than your mother, I will simply attribute your comments to your immaturity.
ruhlman
pardus has always been an over achiever...
mike pardus
Just bored, no one to cook for for a few days, and procrastinating about sheetrocking my daughter's bedroom.....
Don't worry, I won't have THAT much time to waste again for a while.
lux
I have an opinion on this issue but I'm going to keep my mouth shut, because I'm really tired of the pro/anti foie yelling.
Like gun control, abortion, and US Presidential politics, whether or not foie gras is cruel is one of those issues where people come in with their minds already made up. Nobody is going to change their position from an Internet flame-fest, they're just going to sling mud and reinforce their current beliefs.
I'm not playing that game, either in MR's house or elsewhere.
Claudia
Ditto, Lux. Why are we even rehashing the foie issue - yet again? And why are we having to reiterate the manners issue again? Didn't this board begin with unapologetic culinary Francophilia?
Good luck with the sheetrocking, Chef Pardus, and Happy New Year - Michael, Bob Del G, Tags, Parkbench, Faust, and everyone else. Let's just be glad we not only have plenty of food, but also plenty of food choices - and the freedom to express our food opinions. Civilly.
stephanie
A complete aside:
Michael - Frank Bruni mentions you in his latest blog post as one of the best food oriented books to come across his desk this year.
http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/2007/12/28/a-banquet-of-words/#more-355
Congratulations, and Happy New Year!
stephanie
Dammit, I always hit post too quickly!
as "having written" one of the best...
Skawt
To be honest, I don't care how they're treated as long as the resulting food isn't poisonous. Given the choice, I prefer to buy meats and produce that do not originate from the conglomerates like ConAgra.
Maddox said it best: "For every anymal you don't eat, I'm going to eat three." Accompanied by a picture of a cooking pot containing a toucan, a koala and a monkey. Yum!
I have tried fois, and to be honest I don't really like it. I never really acquired a taste for fat on that scale in terms of flavor. As my first chef instructor always said, "fat means flavor". I'm just not one of those people where I can eat something where fat is the only flavor.
PETA fanatics are absolutely ridiculous. They scream and gnash their teeth and spend so much energy on subjects that should really be low on the priority list. Global warming, eventual depletion of oil, AIDS, widespread hunger, lack of proper medical facilities in third world countries, etc. But of course, people don't matter to them, they're only interested in the cute fuzzy animals. Step over a poor homeless wretch in order to throw paint on someone wearing fur.
You know what? You get the right to complain about fois gras when waterfowl get the right to vote. Until then, blow it out your ass.
kevin
I see what you guys mean about FB, I don't know what his/her bargain was but clearly he/she got screwed just like Faust.
Bob delGrosso
FaustainBargain
You know better than to write that kind of stuff about me. Please cease and desist or take me up on my months earlier request to address me directly with your real name via email.
mike pardus
Hey Skawt - If you live anywhere near New Paltz, NY. I'd like to buy you a couple of beers...and a burger...and some grilled rabbit....and a couple of quail...hell, I'd cook you a gawdam kitten if that's what you wanted to wash down with the beer. I haven't had a good belly laugh all week. Thanks
laika
I'm reading The Elements of Cooking with great interest, it's one of two things I got for christmas that I'm going through right now ("Pork & Sons" is the other) and one funny thing that I noticed almost right away is that, in the essay on stock, in the tribute to veal stock, it reads "our celebrity chefs, if they include a veal stock recipe, tend to bury it in the back of their big, beautiful books." Which is funny, because the celebrity chef who wrote the introduction to The Elements of Cooking has a veal stock recipe (complete with a long tribute and anecdote about how they're cooking stock all the time, on every free burner at les halles) front and center in his Les Halles Cookbook.
The Elements of Cooking is terrific so far, thanks awfully for doing such a good job on it.
best,
laika
faustianbargain
#1: it is not about whether you approve of the foie gras farms in the united states. it is about whether those who think that is a cruel production have the right to hold that view without ridicule or shame.
why is this a difficult concept to grasp. remember how it upsets foie gras lovers when they were told that foie gras will be banned. its the same logic. dont tell people that their deeply help beliefs deserve to be mocked.
#2. re maiming and deriding, it was the general tone of the people who support foie gras production in this blog and elsewhere.
#3. you said:"The only reason I find acceptable to oppose foie production is if you are morally opposed to killing all animals for food - I can't argue with your morality, but I think it's reasonable for you to accept that mine is different."
agreed! but the people who oppose your point of view is miniscule compared to the vast majority who quietly accept a life without foie gras. in this are included many vegans and vegetarians..even trotter and puck. the amount of vitriol directed towards these people is unacceptable.
if legislatively, they try to ban a practice that they consider cruel, let the foie gras camp spend similar currency on their efforts. trotter, for example, did it through the action of refraining from cooking foie gras. he didnt do it through protests or namecalling.
#3. a lot of people eat fish, but wont eat meat. some have chicken, but wont have beef. some will eat organic, free range eggs, but not the eggs from battery chicken. some will consume only locally produced meat and vegetables and fruits. there has to be NO uniformity or need to conform. individuality is a fascinating concept. you should contemplate on that rather than trying to decide if those who debate foie gras have similar opinion on battery chicken. the two have NOTHING in common.
the much derided 'peta and its ilk' have also opposed battery chicken. even before it became popular or fashionable to reject battery raised chicken, it was these very animal activists groups who opposed battery chicken. how do you think the public awareness for the dismal conditions in the majority of american farms came to be known? think about that!
#4. btw, who do you think you are to tell people what their food choices should be or shouldnt be..why they should oppose foie gras and still consume battery chicken? it doesnt feel good, does it..when someone tells you that you are scum for eating foie gras, the outrage you feel is not dissimilar to how you judge other people's eating choices.
#5. it seems to me that people who dictate that the other camp must be vegan or nothing else! are intent to create a black and white world...where you want activists and apathetic viewers. clearly divided camps..but just two camps! so it becomes easier for you to brand the inconvenient ones as the 'rabid animal rights terrorists'.
and you think the moderate ones should disappear..that there should be a 'left and a right'...'black and white'..'all or nothing'.
#6. the problem with battery chicken and badly raised food in this country is that there is no way to identity the source and method of production of the food that is produced. when you go to a restaurant..when you pick up meat from the grocery store..people cannot afford mortgages, how do you expect them to identity which meat is ethically tainted?
there is product A whose origins are murky. there is product B whose origins are squeaky clean and visible. there is product C whose origins are tainted and deemed cruel by many.
think of product A as battery chicken, product B as ethically and 'humanely' raised meat and product C as foie gras. the average consumer can outright reject product C and outright embrace product B. unless, they know about product A, how can they make a choice?
#7. earlier, you mentioned that you are ok with those who are vegans and those who dont use animal products at all. there are people in this very blog audience who were part of a post about 'humane slaughter'..it has to do with chris cosentino's pictorial presentation at a slaughterhouse. i myself argued that there is nothing 'humane' about slaughter. meat is food...and there is no point dressing it up as 'humane' or 'inhumane'. in that context, there is very little difference between us except that you are a lot more intolerant than i am. i call murder, murder and hope that talking incessantly about it will allow others to see murder as it is and our existence which involves making such choices. you, on the other hand, think that it is ok to murder and that there is no room for moral choices.
thats the funny thing about choices. our choices are defined by our needs. some of us need more than others, obviously. that need, inherently, is not 'wrong' if it seen from a individualistic point of view. on the other hand, there are some human universals...including empathy,anthropomorphisation, violence proscribed etc which are all directly responsible for a natural revulsion towards the production process of foie gras. even in a hunt or a kill...or slaughter, we are swift to separate the life from the carcass. to fatten a creature and to lead it to its death causes extreme discomfort to many people...regardless of their opinion or knowledge level about battery chicken. when you judge that, you are question human nature.
why do we disapprove of incest..why do feel jealousy...why are we afraid of death...why are children afraid of loud noises..why are women natural caregivers than men..there may be exceptions, but these are human universal..as is the instinctive disgust towards the idea that an animal is experiencing 'seeming' discomfort to die for one's meal. i am sure the same sentiment will rear its head if one is shown images and footage of battery raised chicken or slaughter.
on the other hand, it will convert a lot of meat eaters to vegetarians and vegans. which is what 'peta and its ilk' have been doing for years.
#8. re the comments about how 'natural' foie gras is..it relates to an earlier comment by tags who said that foie gras is natural. no its not. its a breeding program. to whitewash it as a 'natural' byproduct of a migrating bird is a lie. it doesnt happen. we make it happen. its true that animal husbandry was developed to make consumption of food easier, but to use the term 'natural' as a point of argument to sell the foie gras agenda is a blatant slap on the face of all thinking people with more than half an ounce of intelligence.
#9 re the point on 'bullshit' about spending between 'luxury goods' and 'battery chicken', do you think that these people who buy 99c chicken while having two televisions in their house will ever buy foie gras or lose sleep over its ban. in fact, i dont think those who eat lip smackin' 99c chikin for dinner even care about foie gras or its production or its ban. to keep bringing up battery chicken and its consumers in a discussion about foie gras and its ban is completely irrelevant.
if 99c chicken is a luxury that isnt sustainable anymore, it only strengthens my theory that there is way too much meat consumption in this country and its about time less animals are bred and slaughtered for the table. somehow, i have a feeling that you wont agree with me here.
#10. you said: "I have watched self professed omnivores faint at the sight and smell of factory processing and seen the same people - the very same individuals - enjoy and learn from a visit to a foie farm. If both processes were broadcast side by side the stomachs would be turning toward foie gras."
really? do we have a name or a face or a voice of such an omnivore? people say this all the time..yet, i have never met even one person like you mention. when you say 'sight and smell of factory processing', what do you mean? were they shown how the ducks are being processed. its interesting, isnt it..how one who is upset by the blood and gore of chicken is relishing the processing of a foie gras duck!
#11. my last post was a general reply to the earlier comments here..including the lies about trotter. anything specific directed towards you comes from the single statement about your involvement with bob delgrosso in the video you linked to in his blog. in which, i believe you appear. why should i trust your opinion when you are clearly associated with someone whose opinions are tarnished with bias?
#12. you said: "And the part about "pink panties on altenate months" and the personal reference to my age qualifies you to declare who maintains dignity and decency? And sets the tone of your argument as unbiased? Once again, your logic eludes me. "
once again, i sincerely apologise about my unforgivably rude first comment to you.
re your age, i googled you and after seeing you had 35 years of experience in the field, i wasnt going to trash talk to someone who is about as old or older than my mother. i respect age. if you are offended by it, i am sorry because it wasnt intended to insult you. it is one of the promises that i try to keep. if i didnt see the '35 years of experience'(leading to a vague calculation of your age), i certainly wouldnt have apologised for my appalling language. i dont necessarily respect your views. i certainly dont know if you are someone who i can respect as a person. but i'd rather back off after a certain point.
#13, i think this discussion amuses 'ruhlman and his kin'. considering the immaturity of certain pro foie gras arguments, i am simply repaying with similar currency.
faustianbargain
skawt said: "You know what? You get the right to complain about fois gras when waterfowl get the right to vote. Until then, blow it out your ass."
to which mike pardus replied: "Hey Skawt - If you live anywhere near New Paltz, NY. I'd like to buy you a couple of beers...and a burger...and some grilled rabbit....and a couple of quail...hell, I'd cook you a gawdam kitten if that's what you wanted to wash down with the beer. I haven't had a good belly laugh all week. Thanks"
and to think that some people complain about immaturity levels.
to skwat: children dont vote..are you ok with incest or child abuse? is it too much complaining?
mike pardus
Ok, really quick, and then I promise not to keep this ball rolling.
"if i didnt see the '35 years of experience'(leading to a vague calculation of your age), i certainly wouldnt have apologised for my appalling language"
- so, by your own rules, it would therefore be acceptable for me to use appalling language toward you without apology....
which leads me to
"and to think that some people complain about immaturity levels"
- it was funny, the way Bourdain's bluster is funny, the way the 3 Stooges are funny.....it was the completely unexpected and outrageous punch-line that made me laugh.....and, because of my years, I don't have to be apologetic. See, we agree on something after all. Enjoy your weekend.
Vincent
Wow - WTF?
Hope everyone has a great new year - I find myself giggling through some of these posts.
"pink panties on altenate months" had me peeing a bit in my pants - twice. Some people have to chill and choose their battles. Most food issues in this country could USE the passion shown in these posts...the discussion could be progressive, sincerely.
mike pardus
Oh, shit, one more thing.....You're completely right about the Kids/Voting thing too....bad choice for skawt to use that analogy without qualifiction, I knew you were going to nail him on that one...
Vincent
Hehe Pardus...
"I'm a victim of soicumstance!"
"Nyuk-Nyuk!"
Claudia
While he might have been victimized, at least Pardus isn't wearing pink Spock panties, Vincent (!) (At least, I don't think so. Nawwwwww. Not a Brooklyn boy!)
For those to whom it might apply, take your pink panties OFF your head, and put 'em back on your younger sexually dichotomous sibling, fer chrissakes! It's cutting off the blood to your brain!
Skawt
The difference between children and waterfowl is that children can grow up to vote, while waterfowl grow up and STILL GET EATEN.
Yeah, comparing fois with incest and child abuse? I recommend considering Car Sagan's Baloney Detection Kit:
http://users.tpg.com.au/users/tps-seti/baloney.html
Look up "Excluded Middle" and "Straw Man". We're talking about food animals, not sentient beings. Although some people raise children that could only barely qualify as sentient, but that's a whole other kettle of fish.
Chef Pardus:
Lux and I will actually be in the New Paltz area in June. I would be happy to look you up then while we're in town.
Skawt
Chef Pardus:
Oh, as for apologies: I'm sorry you're old.
(Turned 42 2 weeks ago. I'm catching up!)
Tags
As I said earlier, I'm partly to blame for giving mouth-to-mouth to a resurrected horse. Let's let the professionals on Wikipedia do the arguing for us.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foie_gras_controversy
I especially liked "Do Ducks Have A Soul" further down the page.
luis
laika, I agree that the "Elements of Cooking" is an outstanding good read about cooking and some of the terms and techniques that elevates anyone's game in the kitchen.
I do think someday Ruhlman will look at his work and decide to update and expand on it. Some of the terms and definitions leave me in a lurch. ie; Shocking? for one. What I mean is that I think this book is bigger than what is in print as of now. This book deserves to be updated every few years. Don't you think?
mike pardus
Skawt - June, huh? Cool......Maybe we can coax DelGrosso to come up....might have to keep the exact location secret, though....PETA would love to get us all in the same building together, I'm sure.
PS - I'm 50....started cooking for cash at 15 - hence the 35 years. Still have a juvenile streak a mile wide though....line cook mentality, hard to shake.
Skawt
Chef Pardus:
While I am definitely not a vegetarian, I would have some trouble eating animals I consider pets - such as cats, dogs and fluffy bunnies. On the other hand, chicken and ducks have ugly feet, so they are on the "GET IN MAH BELLY" list in my house. Pigs are sometimes cute, but they're also fat and slow and have it coming - I don't trust their piggy little eyes. Lamb? Ever see what they look like after they've been sheared? Like little four-legged grandmas. Yick.
If you have any pull with Bob delG to get him to show up, that would be cool - although previous attempts by other list members to get him to go to NYC met with no success. he sure is liking life on the farm. I think he should change his name to Oliver Douglas and make sausages out of Arnold the pig.
ntsc
'skawt said: "You know what? You get the right to complain about fois gras when waterfowl get the right to vote. Until then, blow it out your ass."
to which mike pardus replied: "Hey Skawt - If you live anywhere near New Paltz, NY. I'd like to buy you a couple of beers...and a burger...and some grilled rabbit....and a couple of quail...hell, I'd cook you a gawdam kitten if that's what you wanted to wash down with the beer. I haven't had a good belly laugh all week. Thanks"
and to think that some people complain about immaturity levels.
to skwat: children dont vote..are you ok with incest or child abuse? is it too much complaining?
Posted by: faustianbargain | December 28, 2007 at 07:46 PM '
Ahhhh - children.
I think Jonathan Swift had the solution there and one FB's parents could have put to good use.
Chef Pardus, are you still teaching and live around New Paltz or are you at a resturant there?
ntsc
If the owner of this site would come up with a way for us to comment directly on his books, I wouldn't have to post this in the middle of a diatribe on the joys of fois gras, which I love.
I hung my second fresh salted ham to dry cure yesterday, a la Charcutire 'Dry Cured Ham'. Next year perhaps I'll see if I can buy it from del Grasso. Last year's was Shoprite special, but still pretty good for a first attemp. Not at the level of what we get at the local cheese shop, but still 12 lbs net of dry cured ham for under $30 is not to be sneezed at. This one will be not quite $75 net.
ntsc
"why is this a difficult concept to grasp. remember how it upsets foie gras lovers when they were told that foie gras will be banned. its the same logic. dont tell people that their deeply help beliefs deserve to be mocked."
A deeply held belief which is wrong deserves to be mocked, held up to ridicule, slandered and ignored.
Attempting logic with such is to no avail because it is a matter of belief and evidence to the contrary will be of no use.
Why is it wrong to mock somebody who insists that the earth is flat?
Frances Davey
Michael. Spike the punch. Please. Let us know tomorrow who you found making out in the pantry.I hope we are all very surprised.
Nic Heckett
Skawt - Pigs, fat and slow? You now have a job, come out to Black Oak Holler Farm and help us load pigs! You get to chase them on the steep slopes. They will make you feel fat and slow! Only way to catch them is with a bag of food.
Tags
I talked to "Bob delGrosso" and he's pissed that you gave away his real name.
So he will not be joining you in June. He did say that Arnold was delicious, though.
Skawt
Nic:
You're not feeding them enough. Ask Ruhlman; the more pork belly, the better. Feed them until they can't move. Then all you have to do is roll them.
Besides, if they didn't want to get eaten, they shouldn't have decided to be so damned tasty.
Tags
And catching pigs should be easy for me, seeing as how I resemble a bag of food.
Skawt
Tags:
Bob gives away his own name here and everywhere else. Now if only he'd give away some of that pancetta...
Tags
So, I guess you'll be calling him "Ollie" from now on, then.
The pancetta should be ready in June. (he forgave you already)
Tags
Why is it wrong to mock somebody who insists that the earth is flat?
Because they might be right
http://tinyurl.com/3cybyy
nondiregol
"Eppure si muove"---Galileo
Tags
"Wild thing, I think you move me
but I wanna know for sure"---The Troggs
Nic Heckett
You're not feeding them enough. Ask Ruhlman; the more pork belly, the better. Feed them until they can't move. Then all you have to do is roll them.
They are plenty fat. They still move pretty well. A 300 lb porker charging full tilt up an Appalachian mountainside is a sight to behold.
Tags
Great writeup in the Washington Post, Nic. And you'll have to forgive Skawt, he loves a good pork roll.
http://tinyurl.com/2vmpsh
brad
The day After I ate at El Bulli, I had the distinct pleasure to eat at a small french restaurant in carrsaconne France. I had a simple cassoulet made by a 90 year old french woman.
Whose food was "better"...I'll never know for sure. Both soulful and magic. I love everything about french food, and the french ways of approaching it. You can't unexplode a bomb. The french culinary influence is now part of our DNA and it will never disappear...thank God.
brad
The day After I ate at El Bulli, I had the distinct pleasure to eat at a small french restaurant in carrsaconne France. I had a simple cassoulet made by a 90 year old french woman.
Whose food was "better"...I'll never know for sure. Both soulful and magic. I love everything about french food, and the french ways of approaching it. You can't unexplode a bomb. The french culinary influence is now part of our DNA and it will never disappear...thank God.
Nic Heckett
thanks tags - we were happy, not quite ready for prime time and I would have been glad to hold off a year before the publicity, but Jane Black is great and we couldn't say no. Glad to see Heath Putnam's woolypigs.com get some copy also. Best pork in the Seattle area, look for him at the Farmer's Market there.
Vincent
Correction - I have fully pissed myself at the thought of Foie Gras-nistas marching down main street in thier "Pink Spock Panties"! Caludia - my "victim of soikumstance" remark to pardus was due to his stooges reference, not that I think he was victimized. If a certain pink spock panty wearing person wants to challenge a guy from brooklyn that works with sharp knives all day, said person is probably a dipshit!
mike pardus
ntsc - I still teach at the CIA....best job I can imagine, I certainly couldn't have spared all that time if I actually WORKED for a living these days. and....btw - if y'all could stop calling me "Chef", I'd appreciate it. I guess I am one, but I barely have any callouses on my hands anymore, I feel fraudulant accepting the title in front of people who actually do work for a living.
Skawt
Some guy named Mike Pardus:
It's a habit I picked up in school when I was at CCA - all of the chef instructors were addressed as "Chef". I use it as a term of respect, since I chose not to go into the culinary field as a profession. I decided to stick with being a network system administrator instead.
You get to sit and screw around on the internet a lot more this way.
lux
@Nic: better to have good press at any time than bad or no press when the timing is 'right'.
ntsc
I've done about 8 Saturday courses and a boot camp at CIA, the instructors are called Chef. what would you like to be called?
I've taught at the college level, it is hard work, especially with students who want to learn. Fun but hard.
We inventoried the stock freezer today and my wife is downstairs making pea soup with some ham we had in there. I spent the morning canning veal stock.
Tags
My guess is we can call him Mike, since Michael is already taken.
mike pardus
Yeah, I 've gotten used to it at work, that's what we're all called and it does come in handy. I know it's usually meant as a term of respect, but The student's joke is "the shortest distance between two points is "YES,CHEF"....I certainly prefer it to "Professor Pardus"....which really makes me squirm around PhDs.....
"Mike" is fine, "Pardus" works too. Thanks for asking.
laika
luis, i totally agree, in re: updates. just as sous vide mightn't've warranted a mention had the book been written twenty years ago, I'm certain that many topics will merit inclusion, expansion, revision or further explanation as time goes on. shocking, for what it's worth, is when you plunge parcooked or cooked foods into an ice bath to arrest cooking immediately. i do it particularly with things like broccoli rabe, which I'll parcook, shock & then sautée to finish, but it's got all sorts of useful applications. probably it's just something you're already doing w/o knowing there was a name for it.
best!
laika
luis
laika, I agree with you 100%. I think Ruhlman will see it that way too. My point about shocking is that the term as many others are lacking in specifics. Specifically shocking veggies or hardboiled eggs are two different things that will require a specific time duration. None of this is really covered in the book. My point is that shocking is a technique and NOT! a mere definition. So as a technique Ruhlmans definition falls short of giving me the detailed explanation I really really want and need... but it's a starting point and there is the internet for me to drill into this "term"/"technique" and find out more about it. I just can't wait to see a bigger more detailed follow up of the elements.
Happy new year to you and all! I have a pretty good idea of the type of cooking I will be doing in 08 and I can't wait to scrub my recipe database of 07's recipes and point it in the direction of the future. Like "Remi" said when its dad asked him where he was headed... I am headed to the future I hope..he said.
luis
Hey gang.. speaking of the future, If you donned a hooka mask and some goggles and zipped up in a scuba suit and went into a big immersion blender set at the right temperature..?
It would seem like a back into the womb adventure. But naaaaaaahhh.. they would probably just end up pulling you out for supper and shocked you with a cold shower.
mike pardus
"Shocking"....should have been cross referenced with "Blanching" (blanching was crossed with shocking, but not the other way around). I think that we assumed a level of knowledge/experiance among readers that we should not have - i have to be very careful of this when I am teaching - easy for me to assume that because it seems simple and self evident to ME that a brief explanation will suffice for my students. You cook what ever it is - broccoli rabe, egg, pasta, shrimp - until it is cooked to your specification for a particular need (par-cooked, half cooked, JUST cooked...)and then immediately remove from the cooking liquid and plunge it into ice water to arrest the cooking. Leave it in the ice water until it is COLD to the touch and then remove and hold cold/cool until you need to use or reheat it. A hard bolied egg would simpley be peeled and used for deviled aggs, for example....par-cooked broccoli rabe would be sauteed in hot oil to complete the cooking.
It's not the same thing, exactly, but worth noting that roasting seeds and nuts will over cook if allowed to brown perfectly and THEN removed from the heat source and left in the hot pan they were roasted in. Obviously you cant plunge them into ice water, but you should have a cool metal pan on which to spread them out so that they can cool quickly without over browning - in effect, "shocking" them to quickly arrest the cooking and color change before it goes too far. I hope this helps clarify....
Tags
Maybe Michael could put in an errata file for each of his books in the "View my complete list of books" link. A simple text file should do the trick.
Of course, this can wait until he hires an intern.
nondiregol
...okay, I'm the evil bastard who want's to frog march trotter but I didn't know that Faust and Pardus would build the story into Moby Dick. "Call me Ishmael."
bob
I'm thrilled to be making a trip up to Seattle's U district market on the 19th to buy as much Wooly pig from Heath Putnam as I can fit in my car and keep cold. I was looking for some dinner suggestions, as I will be staying overnite. I believe he's selling fairly young hogs this time around...6-8 months mmmmmmmmmmmmm!
Nic Heckett
Nice one Bob - say Hi to Heath for me
luis
Mike, thank you for clarifying this term. Still I read your explanation and I can not help but think, that there is a art to cooking that defies terms and techniques. For instance the last thing I want is shocked cold hard boiled eggs... gimme the hot crappy green slime hard boiled eggs anytime.
This is NOT! a simple issue to me. Now I know you get perfect eggs the way ruhlman suggests and now I wonder about the temperature of the shocked eggs and I wonder if reheating them doesn't just negate the whole process... just me.. I guess.
bob
Mike,
You speak to a subject that I think is invaluable to home cooks, and often taken for granted in restaurants. That is the ability to control heat. Blanching/ shocking. Toasting seeds, spices, or nuts, then removing them to a cold pan to quickly cool. Pan searing, oven roasting. And even carry over cooking techniques. There is so much stuff that falls under this topic.
Nik,
Hi,I will say hi to Heath, and hope to bring pics of his product.
mike pardus
luis - thanks for pinning me down to exactly what you need. You don't have to shock hard boiled eggs until they are cold if your intent is to eat them hot, for that matter, I think trying to reheat them would make them worse. The reason for dropping them into ice water is to arrest the cooking - if you want to use them cold AND to facilitate ease of peeling. Someone else is going to have to weigh in to explain that one(why they're easier to peel - I can look it up, but there's sheetrock calling my name....) Just curious....do you really like HOT HOT hard bolied eggs? If so, I guess that you could forgo the shocking, forget about peeling and simply crack 'em in half with a knife and spoon out the perfectly cooked center. To cook them - start in room temp water, put in a handful of salt (why? I dont know that either - old cook's tale, maybe? some sort of chemistry - delGrosso, where are you?) cover the pot, bring to a full boil and then remove pot from heat, keeping lid on, water and eggs in. Set timer for 10 minutes.when timer goes off either shock or consume eggs immedietly.Remember - you ARE NOT boiling them for 10 mimutes, you're letting them sit in very hot water for 10 minutes. I did it this morning so we'd have a snack to eat while skiing. That's why I like 'em cold - they travel well in your pocket - even peeled(in a zip lock bag, external pocket of parka, not your Levis).
I hope that this is detailed and specific enough....and anyone who can tell us why the salt and the shocking seems to make peeling easier - please inform....
Laika
what I've always heard, about salting water, is that in addition to imparting whatever seasoning it does, it also changes the boiling point of water, bringing it to the boil faster..
Bob delGrosso
Mike
Re: hard boiled eggs and "shocking"
Hard boiled eggs are submerged in ice water, buried in snow, placed in a blast freezer or in some way shocked (an unfortunate sounding word that conveys very little information about what is actually going on when hot food is cooled rapidly) to stop the egg from cooking and keep it from turning green.
Heat and pressure (and all energy and matter really) will flow from where they are most concentrated to where their concentration is less. In a hot egg submerged in ice water, the heat and pressure flows rapidly from the inside of the egg to the cold water outside.
Well done egg yolks (and hard boiled=well done) give off sulphide gas that if left to hang around combines with iron molecules in the yolks to form iron sulfide which is a funky green color. Shocking the eggs sends the gas flying out so that it cannot combine with iron.
I suppose you could achieve the same effect by putting your hard boiled eggs in a vacuum chamber but, well, that's not very practical.
Bob delGrosso
Laika
That's not true.
The opposite happens, salt makes the water take longer to boil. Almost everything that dissolves in water raises the boiling temp and the freezing temp.
Ms.Anthrope
Having a small egg factory by way of 5 hens, I have an answer for you (well, the ladies AND Alton Brown)!
A fresh egg is damned near impossible to peel. The reason being the shell membranes are very attached to the albumen in the egg white. As the egg ages, the albumen breaks down and will release from the membrane somewhat easier.
I have not tried the salt water trick but I HAVE tried different aged eggs and found about two weeks is about right for peeling. Seeing I can rarely keep eggs around for two weeks, maybe I'll give the salt a try and see if that works. My guess is it hastens the breakdown of the albumen.
Mathias Eichler
Ahhhhhh Eggs!
I love the turn this conversation has made - back the simple, quite delicious Egg!
Perfect - I love Eggs, eat them softboiled almost every morning....
Check out:
http://web.mac.com/livelifeloud/einmaleins/STORE/Pages/Take_2.html#2
for the ultimate softboiled egg opening device - from Germany of course!
Is it Easter soon??
mike pardus
OK, BdG - just a layperson probably getting in over his head....help me out on the salt thing - is it possible that the salt is able to permeate the shell (it is porous, I know that) and denature the outer albumin layer quickly enough (within 10 minutes?) to facilitate ease of peeling in a fresh egg? 2 out of the 3 I peeled this morning were easy, the 3rd - not so much, but not a disaster either ( they were store boght, at least a week in my frige).
Thoughts?
Also - we add vinegar to easter eggs when we color them, does this just help the dye set or does it make them easier to peel also?....Albumin is alkalin....acid denatures proteins....any correlation?
Nathalie
Hello Mike Pardus,
interesting question this salt no salt in water for boiling eggs. Found this...
On Food and Cooking- Harold McGee, super short version.
Cooking eggs= coagulation.
Salt and acid accelerate coagulation, as does water temperature, should not exceed the boiling point (consider elevation), and affect PH.
Peelability is affected by the PH of the egg white, and so by the egg's freshness. Egg PH below 8.9 the membranes adhere to albumen. Fresh egg PH 8.0, eggs at 3 days refrigeration PH around 9.2.
Vinegar in dye- sets color, and produces an even coating. The chemistry behind this can be found with any search about acetic acid, and its various uses in the textile and food industries.
Warning- the search for why acetic acid affects dyes will lead you down a very long rabbit hole.
Cheers, and Happy New Year everyone!
mike pardus
OK, then, new experiment .....will adding baking soda (sodium biconbonate) to the cooking water facilitate ease of egg peeling in hard boiled eggs? Without noticably altering flavor?
Bob delGrosso
Mike et al
No answers only hypotheses
I'm not sure if there is much salt penetration when the egg is in hot salted water, but salt dissolved in cool water will penetrate egg shells. Point is that I'm not sure that the rules that apply to shucked eggs cooked in salted water also apply to eggs in shells.
If there is any effect, perhaps salted water enhances the loss of water from the egg, thereby reducing the net size of the albumen. A smaller tighter, albumen will be further from the shell thus making it easier to peel.
Another reason (in addition to the info cited by MsAnthrope and Nathalie) that an old egg is easier to peel than a fresh egg is that the older one has less water.
For what it's worth, I don't add salt to water to hard or soft boil eggs.
I don't think that baking soda added to hot water would make the egg easier to peel. However, letting the eggs sit in warm/cool alkaline water before cooking just might do the trick. Although the final product might taste pretty funky.
Finally, I believe that the vinegar that is used for dying eggs is added to etch the shell and make it more permeable to the dye.
Claudia
Chef Pardus, I'm afraid the name "Michael" is already taken on this blog, as is "Mr. Softy Palms" (!) If you're uncomfotable with Chef, are you OK with Mike or Michael P, just as we have Bob D and Bob T, and Claudia (Nashville) as opposed to just Claudia (me)? Welcome to the blog, by the way - however bumpy an intro that might have been (!)
cathelou
And I thought making the eggs "easier to peel" just meant cooling them so they wouldn't be too hot! Thanks for the info!
Nathalie
Bonjour Mike Pardus,
saw something about using bicarbonate... nicely drawn conclusion. That said, rumours are that you may encounter an unpleasant soapy flavor.
Look forward to your test results.
mike pardus
I'm not uncomfortable with "chef"....I just feel that a lot of others posting here might deserve the title more than I...by virtue or their long hours and meta carpel calouses - also, you don't work for me, and we're learning togehter from each other - I'm not the "Chef" here. call me what ever you like...."MP" is how I would sign most e-mail, "pardus" works - fairly uncommon name....call me anything you like...I've been called "scum" recently and thought it a badge of honor because of who decreed it....so, I guess "scum" would be OK too. "Mr. Softy Palms???" sounds like a handle for "an alternative life style" web site....I just said that I'd lost my calouses, not my gender preference.
Yes, excess alkaine will result in a soapy flavor in baked goods...it needs to be tested in Boiled Eggs. I'm going to test it in the morning...I'm thinking that the key may be to establish a ratio of Soda to water which allows for ease of peeing without altering flavor. I'm also going to try pricking a pin hole ni the top of the egg before boiling - to acelerate the alkaline intake.
Do you have any idea how difficult it is to type at 3:00 AM on New Years day and make sence???? Don't look for results beofre 4:00 pm......
mike pardus
Before turning all of your eggs in to Nog, try this at home and see if your results match mine....here's what I did:
Using newly purcheased XL eggs with a "use by date" of Feb 1.
two seperate pots each with 1 qt cool tap water.
Pot "a" had 1 Tablespoon Baking soda added, pot "b" 1 TBSP kosher salt
Put both pots on high flame at same time - both reached full boil within a few seconds of each other.
When boil was reached heat was turned off and pots were covered for 10 minutes.
After 10 minutes both pots were drained of hot water, egg left in, and pots each filled with cool tap water again.
Eggs allowed to sit in cool water for 1 minute.
Eggs were then shelled.
Both eggs peeled with ease - no noticable difference.
Whites were firm, yolks pleasing yellow.
egg "a" had a slightly deeper yellow yolk and slightly more firm white, flavor was good - although there was a very slight "baking soda" taste (hard to tell if it would have been noticable in a blind taste or if I was just imagining it)
Tasted with 2 former CIA students....mutual consensus was that there was no decernible difference between the two eggs and that if we had not known we would not have noticed even the slight differences in yolk color or white texture.
hmmmmmm.....need to find some low pH hen fresh eggs to play with next and see if the soda makes a difference there...
Happy New Year y'all......
Tags
Just out of curiosity, I looked up "pardus" on wikipedia.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Pardus
One of the meanings, panthera pardus, means leopard.
Yesterday, I visited a friend of mine, Bob Spotts.
Are you guys related by any chance?
Ms.Anthrope
My girls are on "low production" this time of year but I still find an egg now and then. Next one that I find, I'll try the Baking Soda and let you know.
BTW-I have been told that putting a little vinegar in the water when poaching an egg will keep the whites more cohesive. However, my experience is it makes them kind of rubbery and grainy. Am I doing something wrong or am I just being picky?
Tags
It doesn't get much more cohesive than rubbery.
mike pardus
The acid in the poaching liquid helps to "set" the whites around the yolks - denature's the proteins and keeps them from just floating away. Funny, my friends and I were tag-team cooking this morning, I put the water on the fire for poached eggs and then got caught up in the pH experiment before adding vinegar to the water. Chris stepped in to poach the eggs - figuring that the water was ready to go - and exlaimed - "What the f*** is wrong with these eggs?"......the whites were flying away from the yolks, leaving nicely poached, but essentially naked, yolks floating in the hot water...fixed it with a dash of vnegar and just had a few extra yolks on each plate.
Tags - yeah, panthera pardus....I don't know if it's a good thing or a bad thing...does some remote branch of my family turn into large carnivorous felines at the full moon?.......I don't know, but the "Spots"we're related to have only one "t".
Skawt
Pardus:
Aside from all of the other good info, one thing I picked up in school was the quality of eggs based on age. The older an egg gets, the less round and high the dome of the yolk will be when you crack it open onto a plate.
For the most part, as long as the egg isn't rotten, it's just fine. Properly refrigerated, the egg has a very long shelf life. But if you're going for presentation - and this includes fried and poached eggs - you really want to use as fresh as possible to maintain a firm, round yolk. For hard-boiled, we've seen that the higher the pH the easier they are to peel. And with age, the eggs release moisture (water), the albumen breaks down, and the pH level rises.
I don't know how CIA handles the teaching of food science, but I'm sure the curriculum there covers the basics of the egg:
Grade AA = viscous, clingy white; high, firm yolk, perfect shell.
Grade A = thin, liquid thick white; round, firm yolk
Grade B = no thick white, flat yolk
(Fresh eggs in the market are almost always AA, and degrade approximately one level per week.)
The hydrogen sulfide in the white will get pushed into the yolk creating ferric sulfide, and turns the outside of the yolk green. This is a direct result of cooking the eggs too fast. This is probably why the best method is to boil water, take it off the heat and put eggs in for 10 minutes. That method I've known for a long time - way before cooking school. I'm pretty sure I picked that one up from my mother or grandmother.
Adding salt or acid (vinegar) to the cooking water will coagulate the white seeping out of a cracked egg (and why you use vinegar when poaching).
Oh, and when you're whisking egg whites for a foam/meringue/etc, you want the egg white protein to be completely denatured - through the use of cream of tartar, whipping in a raw copper bowl, adding salt, physical agitation, or using older eggs.
So, fresh eggs aren't always the best for everything.
Bob delGrosso
Ms.Anthrope
What you may be doing wrong is a) using too much vinegar b) heating the eggs too much c) heating the eggs for too long. Try one -not all- of the following. If one doesn't work, try another.
1) reducing the amount of vinegar
2) lower the cooking temp
3) reduce the cooking time.
Oh, and make sure your eggs are always at the same temp before you cook them. If they are warm one day and cold the next, they are going to cook differently.
If I may wax philosophical for a moment. Many negative cooking outcomes can be traced to inconsistent methodologies.
One day the cook leaves a roast out on the countertop for an hour or so before cooking while on another day he pulls it from the fridge and slams it right into to oven. The pre-warmed roast cooked to 125-130, carried over to 140 is evenly rare while the other roast shows a ring of well done on the outside and lens of rare in the middle.
One day he lets the roast rest in front an open window and finds that it only carries over to 130 and on another day he shoves it into a corner and it carries to 150.
Point is that it is not good enough to only focus on the quality of ingredients or the steps that one follows while constructing a recipe. It's also important to focus on the totality of the cooking (And eating!) environment and to be aware of things like internal and surface temperatures of foods prior to, during and following cooking.
I may be stating the obvious here, and I certainly mean no condescension, but when you take cooking seriously, it gets very very interesting and very very challenging.
faustianbargain
i see that there has been some meaningful discussion about food amidst the rah-rah-FG tosh. i feel compelled to address a few points directed towards me...
1. to vincent who said: "If a certain pink spock panty wearing person wants to challenge a guy from brooklyn that works with sharp knives all day, said person is probably a dipshit!"
this is not the smartest innuendo to be throwing around online. you wouldnt do it for yourself, why would you suggest that for someone else. refrain.
2. to ntsc who said: "A deeply held belief which is wrong deserves to be mocked, held up to ridicule, slandered and ignored."
'right' and 'wrong' is relative. especially when it is tied to emotional issues. there are millions of people whose deeply held beliefs re food..most of them are personal some of them are religious and moral. mock them at your own peril.
those who mock vegetarians and vegans shouldnt complain about animal activists protesting against what you put on your plates and into your stomachs.
also, ntsc quipped: "I think Jonathan Swift had the solution there and one FB's parents could have put to good use."
my parents were vegetarians and we were not irish or poor. also, we are a family of brilliant cooks, if i may say so myself..having come from a culture that knows food through cooking and sharing, we were also agriculturists..which means that we progressed beyond hunting and gathering and slaugtering in the longer timeline..we could cultivate and farm and grow our food.
on the other hand, i am sure you wount be averse to cook your own...as w.c.fields would have told you...parboil them for seven hours. even the toughest specimen will come out tender. good luck!
finally to skwat who said:
"The difference between children and waterfowl is that children can grow up to vote, while waterfowl grow up and STILL GET EATEN.
Yeah, comparing fois with incest and child abuse? I recommend considering Car Sagan's Baloney Detection Ki[SNIP] ..."
skwat, if thats the case, why all this fashionable outrage about battery chicken then? chicken dont vote, afterall..is there a difference for you if they are caged or free range? do you care if your beef comes from a four legged beast standing on its own feces and feasts on corn mush or one that grazes the pasture and is grass fed.
animals have the right to live naturally and die naturally. the animals that we rear to provide us with our food, hide, eggs etc deserve to live as naturally as possible as long as they are alive. barns and cages are not natural. sheds, milking machines and hormones are not natural. force feeding through a rubber tube is certainly not natural. it is not about being a vegan and expressing moral outrage. it is about being *anyone*..omnivore, herbivore, vegan, whatever..and expressing moral outrage about how animals are being treated unnaturally. nobody can get to choose who can express moral outrage or who cannot..as mike pardus has unwisely opined earlier.
what exactly is wrong with certain people's decision to consider foie gras production cruel and they refrain from consuming it. even if they are not vegan. the issue is not whether or not foie gras should be banned or made illegal. the issue is about certain opinions that might as well have come from thick pillocks(not that i am saying its YOU..might as well be..but *i* am not saying that)..opinions that seem to assert that just because some people dont find foie gras production uncomfortable, they ARE right and only they are right. at this point, you are the exact twin of animal rights activists of the worst kind. i hold you(and your ilk) with the same contempt.
there is no comparison between fois(sic) and incest/child abuse...there was a comparison between the rights of those who vote and those who dont. please dont change track and complain about that there is a false comparison.
my transmission is over..continue with the regular programming. i doubt if i'll be checking this thread anymore... so, to all... have a good year. let's hope this one is better than 2007 in more ways than one.
Tags
Jerry Mullane from Pig Daddy's Barbecue told me about a friend who tried his smoked turkey and raved about it. The friend said his daughter had a big catering business, so he gave him another turkey for her to try.
When she tried the turkey, she said "this is nothing special."
Maybe it had something to do with Jerry's friend putting the turkey in the freezer before Thanksgiving and serving it for Christmas dinner.
Tags
The FG discussion isn't about having a right to believe it's wrong. It's about ham-handed animal activists trying to get it outlawed.
And I'll try to say it a little slower this time, FB, since it hasn't gotten through to you yet.
The momentum and political capital PETA gained from highlighting the factory farm abuses is being frittered away chasing a red herring down a rathole against humanely grown FG, because FG is a soft target. Wars are not won by picking battles against irrelevant or unimportant units of your enemy's army.
faustianbargain
tags said: "
The FG discussion isn't about having a right to believe it's wrong. It's about ham-handed animal activists trying to get it outlawed.
And I'll try to say it a little slower this time, FB, since it hasn't gotten through to you yet.
The momentum and political capital PETA gained from highlighting the factory farm abuses is being frittered away chasing a red herring down a rathole against humanely grown FG, because FG is a soft target. Wars are not won by picking battles against irrelevant or unimportant units of your enemy's army."
tags, thank you for saying that...and slowly too!! now that you have made it crystal clear, let me summarise what you have graciously allowed me to understand wrt what to expect in future foie gras discussions:
1. individuals(not PETA, the organisation) who are not particularly vegan(includes vegetarians and omnivores too) can abstain and criticise the production methods of foie gras farms.
2. individuals who have never supported PETA(e.g. chef charlie trotter) or any other animal rights activist group, militant or otherwise, will NOT have their name dragged in the mud or blamed wrongly and maliciously for the legislative actions taken against the sale of foie gras in certain states.
3. anyone has the right to disagree that foie gras is not 'humanely' produced regardless of whether or not they have worked in a farm force feeding ducks or watched a duck running towards the feeding tubes in mythical France. just as anyone has the right to argue that TWaT(tm), The War on Terror, is not making the world a better place regardless of whether or not they have chosen to be a career military person or just as anyone can condemn slavery regardless of whether or not they have had ancestors who have been enslaved or just as anyone who hasnt been the victim of domestic violence can be enraged by it.
have a good 2008.
kevin
You're all puppies. I'm 54 and began cooking when I was six (Jello, admittedly, but at six making lime Jello is pretty cool), and I've cooked ever since -- these days I get paid to cook and to write about it.
So youngsters, speaking from my huge wealth of wrinkles and spreading gut, when cooking the only thing that ultimately matters is flavor. And in my experience food that is raised well -- whether squash, veal, or duck livers -- tastes better. The difference isn't huge in any single case, but over time it becomes noticable.
lux
Geeze FB, way to take a perfectly nice conversation about eggs and completely derail it.
Can we get back to the previous topic?
Skawt
FB:
If you continue to post in this thread after saying "goodbye", I am going to respond to every one of your posts with this:
"my transmission is over..continue with the regular programming. i doubt if i'll be checking this thread anymore... so, to all... have a good year. let's hope this one is better than 2007 in more ways than one."
However, you posted again, making you a liar. Add to that the ad hominmem attacks against people. Really, deliberately misspelling my handle? That's childish. Being petulant, insulting and rude is not the way to sway people to your side. It's just annoying everyone.
Your credibility, if any, is now gone. Please go away. Forever.
Tags
The way I see it, FB is right on all three points...
she and others should be allowed to make reasonable rebuttals...
individuals who have not singlehandedly caused foie to be outlawed should not be vilified (I do think they should be mildly reprimanded if they play a supporting "aid & comfort" role)...
anyone has a right to disagree that foie is not humanely processed...
I see her latest post as a breakthrough in what appeared to me as just head-butting on her part, but she really does make some good points. The one that struck home with me was that animal-rights activists were the ones who exposed factory farming as a sham.
I also did some research on Sea Shepherd, and discovered that the ships they were attacking were ostensibly doing "research" on whales but were actually harvesting meat and blubber as if the current ban had never been in place.
With all the duplicity out there, I can understand the frustration of people trying to change what they see as evil.
What we need to realize, is that there are people who foment frustration so that they can point to their detractors and say "see, they're nuts!"
All the more reason to be reasonable in your disagreements, resisting the nasty words, refining your arguments.
faustianbargain
skawt..surely, you jest? 'deliberately misspelling handle?' i am tempted now, but i shall resist.
tags..thanks. a more civilised discussion about foie gras can take place elsewhere and amongst those who want to discuss it if false information can be stemmed at origin.`
i dont see foie gras as 'evil'..its more 'disagreeable' to me. and it is easier to explain why to those who care if arguments such as 'chef trotter helped ban fg in chicago' or 'only vegans have a right to criticise foie gras' etc are nipped at the bud. these statements must die. there are a dozen plus blogs on the net that celebrate foie gras and where they record the joy of preparing one...you wont find me commenting there.
anyone who comes to ruhlman.com or the egullet thread where bourdain offered trotter as a sacrificial lamb at the altar of foie gras come with a preconceived notion..that is also false.
on a slightly different note...on the whale hunting...let this not be done in the name of science. there is nothing new we can learn by killing these magnificent creatures. it is hideous, perverse and obscene to invite science to be part of this massacre.
i would certainly extend an invitation to you when reasonable discussions take place elsewhere online about these issues if you are interested. and i mean this in the most non-evangelical way. take care.
Skawt
FB:
"my transmission is over..continue with the regular programming. i doubt if i'll be checking this thread anymore... so, to all... have a good year. let's hope this one is better than 2007 in more ways than one."
faustianbargain
hey skawt
Skawt
Thanks for proving me right.
"my transmission is over..continue with the regular programming. i doubt if i'll be checking this thread anymore..."
faustianbargain
wow...you are really going to keep doing that? isnt that...like..i dont know..disruptive or something?
Skawt
FB:
You are a classic internet troll. You are insulting, condescending and rude. You make assertions about people without knowing anything about them. When you get called on your behavior, you try to make it look like you are the victim.
You pretty much lost any sympathy anyone might have had for you when you joined this thread with an insult to Michael Ruhlman. You continued to insult anyone that tried to debate you.
And now, you're playing this silly "I'm rubber, you're glue" nonsense, pretending to take the high road.
Seriously. Take your act back to the embaumsworld or somethingawful or 4chan forums where you belong. Everyone else has have enough of your bullshit.
Bob delGrosso
The ducks at Hudson Valley Farms are treated really well. I know because I've seen it with my own eyes. I cannot speak to the conditions at any other farm that produces foie gras, but I can speak for HVF.
Of course, if you are already converted to vegetarian or veganism you won't want to believe me -and I don't know why you would. But I feel that I have an ethical responsibility to stand up for the people at HVF who work so hard to make sure that their animals are comfortable and healthy.
I work on a dairy farm that is certified humane by an organization (Certified Humane http://www.certifiedhumane.com/) that is affiliated with the same people who put the screws on Wolfgang Puck to stop selling foie gras (The Humane Society of the United States or HSUS). I know how we treat our cows, and I don't see that the people at Hudson Valley are treating their animals any worse than we are.
If they use the same standard to judge us that their friends at HSUS judge Hudson Valley, they should have never given us approval. I think.
But then I suppose if you are a convicted vegan you'd probably think that we are abusing our cows by keeping them and taking their milk.
Finally, I've held my tongue on this Charlie Trotter business up until now because I respect him and his work and a lot of the discourse around the subject here has been so nasty. But honestly, I do not understand how Trotter could draw a line in the sand between him and all foie gras and still serve other meat.
It's weird,it makes no sense, and I'd really love it if somebody could explain the logic of it to me.
Vincent
FB - maybe too much wine was involved in the post you referred to. If I offended you I apologize.
I do stick by the fact though, pink spock panties or not, that "anyone who fools with a man from Brooklyn who works with knives all day would be a dipshit" stands.
Ms.Anthrope
OK...real quick because Mythbusters is coming on...
I scored an egg from one of my hens this morning. Tonight, following Mike's method, I cooked using the baking soda solution. Unfortunately, it STILL came out looking a bit like mice had chewed on it. Now...granted this was a less than 12 hour old egg (still warm when I got it this morning) but I really hoped we were on to something here.
To Bob DG-Thank you for the guidance. Definitely, I am guilty of most of the things you listed as possibilities with the exception of overcooking. The fact that they are cooked at all is simply a nod to my roommate who is sure he will find me twitching on the floor from eating nearly raw eggs or some other "nasty thing" that I have foraged from my hikes.
I am also perfectly clear that most of my shortcomings as a cook are entirely of my own doing. I am impatient and easily derailed by shiny objects. Luckily, I have a dog who is more than happy to help hide my failures if it means she won't have to eat kibble.
Although most of the conversations on this blog are way out of my league, not a day goes by where I do not learn somehting and for that, I am grateful to you all!
luis
Mike, thanks for clarifying that. The eggs cook great the way Ruhlman suggests. The shocking just didn't make sense to me. By the way I cook rice that same way and it comes out perfectly as well. Believe me I can do over easy like any iron chef out there but when it comes to perfectly cooked and perfectly peeled hard boiled eggs... I am just dancing around this goal....hit and miss. I like Ruhlmans technique very much. It works but the shocking thing......is like you suggest: don't do it, or it has to be done licketty split to avoid cold hard boiled eggs.
faustianbargain
to bob delgrosso:
re charlie trotter..re his line on the sand..i suppose, its the same as it is with people who wont have veal, but will have beef..as those who wouldnt have meat, but will have fish.
re foie gras ducks, i am not a vegan, but the way i see it, the life of a foie gras duck is not 'natural'. foie gras is a byproduct of migration. it is not a by product of a well fed(or as some would say, forcefed) duck. my objection to the production process of foie gras is the same as it is with placing a tiger(r.i.p, tatiana) in a san francisco zoo or a polar bear behind a glass window in rhode island.
all things poultry is seasonal. they have specific egg laying schedules. it depends on the amount of sunlight and the temperature etc. migratory behaviour is related to the bird's internal biological clock. traditionally, foie gras came from geese..this was before the foie gras process became industrialised in france in the 60s when they discovered that the mulard duck was a lot more compliant than the geese that were notoriously difficult to raise and especially to mate.
in geek speak, i'd say that breeding sterile mulard ducks to force feed and produce foie gras is essentially a form of farm 'hack'. but the continued exploit of this admittedly brilliant hack for mass production in foie gras farm becomes part of the realm of malignant crackerdom, not creative hackerdom.
recently, i came across 'artisan farmers' alliance website. and you have their link on your blog, i noticed too.
they say: "Artisan farmers use traditional, small-scale, sustainable farming techniques to produce the finest food products possible and reconnect American consumers with our rich agricultural heritage."
really..who defines 'small scale'..just because its 'small' compared to smithfield doesnt make it artisan. and there is NO foie gras in america's 'rich agricultural heritage'. and traditional is feeding geese with figs and acorns, not corn mush and fat to sterile male ducks!
here, nicolas maduros, the 'executive director' of artisan farmers alliance says.. ..http://www.philly.com/inquirer/opinion/pa/20070613_Examine_the_facts_in_debate_over_foie_gras.html">here.
.." a Washington-based group that represents America's foie gras farmers and others involved in artisanal agricultural products."(washington, eh? can you spell 'lobby'?...how many artisan farmers do you know who can hire lobbyists and PR firms?...more power to those who can...but seriously 'small scale and sustainable' who has lobbies..please can one of them help out the almond growers in california...and the good men who grow vegetables and berries and apples..we have a problem or two here that will benefit from help from artisan farmers alliances)
Here are some quotable quotes:
"While the protesters have done a lot of shouting, what has been missing is a discussion of the facts. The truth is that foie gras farming is humane. That's the only logical conclusion if you base your assessment on unbiased scientists and veterinarians, rather than vegetarian activists."
yes. i cannot disagree. what has been missing is a discussion of the facts.
"Over the last two years, the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) has studied the science, inspected foie gras farms, and rejected claims that the ducks raised for foie gras are treated inhumanely. "
repeatedly, the the avma or the american vet medical association is beckoned for supporting foie gras production practies as 'humane'. but the truth is that avma has DECLINED to take a position...just as they didnt take a position on gestation crates.
somewhere along the line, i also found out that sonoma farms had trademarked 'artisan' as a brandname for their top tier foie gras after learning the method of production from a farm in france. so what exactly is this 'artisan' foie gras? what is the meaning of 'artisan foie gras'? and who are these artisanfarmes alliance folks? how come they arent supporting any other 'artisan farmer' other than foie gras farmers..is it just for sonoma? maybe its only for those 'farmers' who raise 'artisan'(tm) foie gras? for people to feed ducks and geese from hand, their numbers/flock size must be manageably small, one would imagine.
for the geese, the waddling in the waters and the meadows holds deep social significance..the ducks are less fussy and are not rabidly terriorial and defensive about their grazing land. and during periods of migration, they gorge themselves to sustain themselves during their flight. which automatically assumes that they can FLY with their engorged livers. how many geese or ducks in foie gras farms have you seen that can fly?
to break the natural cycle and life of a living being is unacceptable to some of us. a cow can run pasture and chicken can feed scratchings and worms...and still be acceptable food for human beings. what is judged here is not the choice to consume animal products, but the fairness of it.
it is not about whether or not you can consume foie gras or if sonoma fg or hudson valley must be allowed to produce foie gras..it is about why some of us are convinced that it is not humane the way it is produced(even if we are not all vegans) and we feel insulted when someone drones ad nauseum, ad infinitum that "foie gras is 'human'"...that is not a definitive argument for the 'humaneness' of foie gras production. it is merely an opinion.
and let us not go into the feed. corn mush. is that what ducks and geese eat to gorge themselves for migratory flights? are there corn mush blenders with supplements and fat in every goose and duck's kitchen? seriously?...there is some dispute here...a female american chef who had witnessed the workings of a foie gras farm in france said that duck fat is the fat of choice to go with the corn mush..which is too close for my comfort to cannibalism.
megnut blog carried that interview:
http://www.megnut.com/2006/08/foie-one-chefs-response
eve felder wrote: "The experience I had in France is that they fed the ducks a warm mash of corn, water and duck fat that was administered through a funnel."
so, obviously...this is how they do foie gras in france. it isnt the holy grail. in france, they also beheaded the king and their queen because they couldnt get enough bread. some perspective is needed here before we all go totally apeshit francophile. and god knows, i love them..some of them, at least.
consumption of most animal products can be defended..yes, even meat. fur, not so much anymore..but wool, eggs, milk, cheese, down etc can be byproducts of animals that have led a full, free and natural life before we use them for our needs. crated veal is unacceptable. kobe beef less so.
so, yes...we are not completely free from our dependence on animals for our comfort. we will get there eventually, but for now, the only defense for the production of foie gras is taste...that some people like consuming something that is rich and butter..and yet others like that it is an expensive product. and taste is personal. there are many people who really arent crazy about the taste of foie gras. and many many more who would reject it when they learn how they are produced. and thats the logic of it for some of us.
to imprison a bird from light, flight and open air for three plus weeks with the express purpose of fattening it is horrifying to some of us...it is millions of light years away from the image of contended chickens pulling worms from the garden earth or cows running downhill on a farm..and which will end up in your dinner table anyways.
if you have been part of a hunt for game and have also witnessed the sacrifice of a bound animal at an altar, you'll know the difference. of course, you'd know it best if you were hansel or gretel and fed by the old crone of the black forest. of course, she cared for them. and yes, of course, the farmers feed the birds 'with care' too. they are money makers. there is no other way to treat them. there is a thin line between 'humane production' and 'being careful with stock-in-trade'
mike pardus
OK, I said I was not going to add more fuel to this fire, but FB continiues to mis-state my words "nobody can get to choose who can express moral outrage or who cannot..as mike pardus has unwisely opined earlier" - go back and read what I wrote. My first post here:
" If you are completly vegan and use no animal products because of an ethical stance, I can't argue with you. You're right and I'm right....my atheism does not invalidate your belief in god or vice versa.
But if you consume meat and have not visited BOTH a Foster Farms poultry plant AND Hudson Valley Foie Gras and seen the difference with your own eyes, you should remove yourself from the discussion - you are not well informed enough to have a valid opinion about what constitutes humane animal husbandry and what does not"
and now she has done the same to one of THE most kowledgable, honorable, compassionate, and moral people in the food biz...FB, when you tried twisting Eve Felder's words for your own uses you really pissed me off. I would ask that everyone read the link with Eve's comments so that they can see what was said and how her words were taken out of context while Fb still avoids answering the question - have you or have you not witnessed both factory poultry processing and small scale Foie prouction?
I can not dictate to anyone what to do or how to think, but I will advocate the shunning of this person who so obviously disregards honor, integrity and civil, informed debate.
I will no longer post to threads involving FB.
Hope to have many other spirited conversations on other topics with the rest of you.
Best - MP
Derrick Schneider
FB, The Artisan label came about because SFG wanted to produce a higher-level foie and distribute it themselves, but "Sonoma Foie Gras" was already in use by/licensed to/owned by Grimaud Farms, which does the distribution of SFG. So they came up with Artisan Foie Gras -- Artisan obviously not being a regulated term in this arena. I don't remember all the differences. One is the feed used, I think, the other is whether the liver is cold-eviscerated (pulled from the animal after a night in the fridge) or warm-eviscerated (pulled from the animal immediately after slaughter). I can't remember which is which, but I think Artisan is cold-eviscerated.
The foie gras lobby is relatively new...3 years or so. It's a reaction to the various attempts to ban it throughout the country. The foie gras farmers and other key players such as Ariane Daguin decided to work together.
Claudia
Vincent, would you please e-mail me at bukigreco@aol.com? Thanks. Claudia
faustianbargain
what nonsense:
you said:
"" If you are completly vegan and use no animal products because of an ethical stance, I can't argue with you. You're right and I'm right....my atheism does not invalidate your belief in god or vice versa.
But if you consume meat and have not visited BOTH a Foster Farms poultry plant AND Hudson Valley Foie Gras and seen the difference with your own eyes, you should remove yourself from the discussion - you are not well informed enough to have a valid opinion about what constitutes humane animal husbandry and what does not"
what gives YOU the right to tell people to remove themselves from any argument if they havent experienced what you have...are you the overlord of all those who oversee who should AND shouldnt be outraged by what they perceive as inhumane?
i hate bringing up the holocaust in any kind of argument, but what you are saying is not unlike throwing a tantrum about NOT blaming the nazis unless you were there in GERMANY and didnt see how they were "really compassionate" to the jews, homosexuals, communists and the handicapped.
eve felder said that duck fat is included in the corn mush fed to the ducks she witnessed being fed in france. that is plain bad animal husbandry. yes..even if it is from france. you are the one who is twisting what i said...what i said isnt a criticism of eve felder, but one about the elevated 'artisan' french foie gras production. and before someone comes to tell me that its not how its done in the united states..yes, probably. but who cares...the same standard should apply and maybe united states foie gras farmers must stop telling everyone how they 'learned' it all from the french. isnt it ironic...the small scale..4-5 geese per household 'tradition' is not followed...hudson farms lost thousands in the breeding barn fire..and how is it "small scale" and "traditional" again? do the rest of us look like we are wearing dunce caps and willing vessels to import whatever information self proclaimed 'authorities' like yourself are willing to throw our way? sheesh!
it is important to mention eve felder and the source of her quote just to make a point..that i am not coming up with all this from my hat. she said it. you read it. ask her. it is one more reason not to blindly follow some tradition because its french.
faustianbargain
derrick, thanks. i am aware of that and also that it came to be in use somewhere in 2003..that would place the marketing of the product around 2004. the process itself isnt patented, altho' i believe that it is a trademark.
on a more general note....artisanfarmersalliance claims to represent artisan farmers..and who are these artisan farmers of america who practice 'small scale, traditional' methods of production...rich agricultural heritage of america? seriously...there is no such thing as 'small scale' or 'traditional' production of foie gras...geese raised in home farms in france used to be 'small scale' and 'traditional'..until the 60s when someone figured that the ducks are greedier than the geese and easier to feed. and ariane daguin's father would agree with me...at least on the last part of the sentence. by what definition is sonoma or hudson is 'small scale' or 'traditional', i dont know.
if hudson and sonoma can be in business saying what they do...yes..they breed thousands of sterile ducks..forcefeed the male ducks only and produce them year around under legally acceptable laws of animal husbandry, its a free market. but to claim that they are 'small scale' or 'traditional' is just wrong. it is false advertising. humaneness..like beauty..is a reflection of ourselves. a woman goes through several hours of labour to deliver her child, but she cant be a construction worker. there are men who will do the most gruesome of jobs and blanch at the sight of blood. pain and PERCEPTION of pain is relative and personal too.
visiting a foie gras farm or a factory farm doesnt give a select few the right to deny others to perceive pain or humaneness or feel squeamishness. the stream of lies to make foie gras lessen the human emotion some people feel towards it as a product is a travesty. it is a crime against all humanity because it attempts to strip and rob others of their thinking and judging faculties connivingly and misconstruingly. if a product made for commercial purposes can survive on it's own merits, then it deserves it. foie gras can be appealing to many because of its taste, presentation and the expense of procuring it. but it cannot be made appealing by trying to brainwash people by repeating ad nauseum that it is 'humane' and that is 'natural' and that it is 'traditional'. no, its not. not to me. not to thousands others.
Skawt
Ah, that was the only thing missing from this mess. Just needed to invoke Godwin's Law by comparing something to Nazis and the Holocaust.
Mike Pardus: please e-mail me at skawtnyc@gmail.com when you get a chance. Thanks!
Jennie/Tikka
Okay - my turn.
Faustian - your argument doesn't work because it boils down essentially to this: "If it bothers me - its wrong, if I like it its right." You have bascially made the executive decision for ALL of us that YOU are the final word on right & wrong - which is to place yourself in a VERY high position in respect to the rest of humanity...wouldn't you say?
What qualifies you and your emotional reactions to such an elevated position? What is it about your pain that makes it something the entire rest of the world needs to stop and readjust their lives for?
Imagine if everyone in the world made decisions like that...imagine if 5 billion people put their own feelings above everyone else's. There would be chaos. No two people would ever agree. There has to be a common way for people to determine what is right and what is wrong - and "how it makes me feel" is about the shakiest of territories to try and accomplish that.
That being said - I challenge you to explain to me from a genuine scientific and medical point of view how it would be medically possible for a duck or a goose to feel the type of pain your are insisting it feels. What nerve receives the signals? What is the structure of a duck's brain that would allow it to notice pain??
Very few creatures - humans included, have much of an ability to sense pain internally. Most of the pain that is sensed is through the skin, when its broken. If we could all feel when we had developed cancer in the spleen or elsewhere, there wouldn't be so many people discovering after its very advanced that they were sick.
Explain from a medical perspective how it is possible for a duck or a goose to sense so much pain internally??
Jennie/Tikka
P.S. You also need to stop putting yourself in the position of the animals. When you react you are reacting to the situation happening to you - and not the animal. Your sympathy is not for the animal - it is for yourself....which is the very definition of complete self-centeredness and has nothing to do with compassion. What it is is the complete inability to sense anyone's existence but your own - ergo, what YOU feel, they MUST feel because there is no separateness from your own sense of self. Everything is about you.
We used to have a joke in my neighborhood growing up. There was one lady who was the poster child for this type of thinking. We used to say of her, "SHE'S cold, but WE'RE the one who will have to wear a sweater" and that's exactly what I'm suggesting is going on here.
faustianbargain
jennie/tikka said:
"Faustian - your argument doesn't work because it boils down essentially to this: "If it bothers me - its wrong, if I like it its right." You have bascially made the executive decision for ALL of us that YOU are the final word on right & wrong - which is to place yourself in a VERY high position in respect to the rest of humanity...wouldn't you say?
[SNIP]"
no. you can do what you want. i dont want to be told that either i have to be a vegan or visit a foie gras farm to call it inhumane.
i dont want to hear a thousand times how foie gras is an 'artisan' product or how it is produced in small scale or how it is humane. leave us to our own devices when it comes to critical thinking that is compatible with our style of living.
i also dont want to hear about the results of the dissection experiments on charlie trotter's 'hypocrisy' re foie gras. traci des jardin too quietly stopped serving foie gras a few years ago and apparently, it is back on her menu now. we wont hear anyone or a certain someone calling her a hypocrite. which she isnt, obviously. she is a chef and a businesswoman. i totally respect her and think that she can do pretty much whatever she wants.
but it is interesting how under the same exact circumstances.(after 2003, foie gras is considered politically incorrect or personally abhorrent. it is removed from the menus. it gets back on the menu with no fan fare..only in the case of trotter, he was falsely accused of making it by bourdain which soon became 'a fact' after which he was publicly tarred and feathered..while traci des jardins' menu seem to include foie gras and it appears that she is still the chef patron of jardiniere which means that it happened in her kitchen...it gets curiouser and curiouser) different people are treated differently by a tight group of industry celebrities whose words are being lapped up by certain media outlets and their 'fans'. unfortunately, those who aid certain public figures in these personal ego games dont realise that they are mere enablers in a bigger game from which they, essentially, gain nothing and come out looking as liars or worse, rather silly. it is hilarious for the rest of us who witness it from outside 'the circle'.
but then again, do ask me if i care about how silly the silly folks look.
altho' false advertising is illegal in this country, isnt it?
the rest of what you said..that i snipped...is like the current arguments about torture/waterboarding etc. i am sure 'medical' evidence proves that waterboarding isnt torture. not many people care.
now, please email claudia or skwat for further. instructions.
Jennie/Tikka
Faustian - what you seem to be saying is that the facts don't matter. You refuse to look at it from a fact-only perspective.
Sure, there's a lot to be upset at in this world - that much we all agree on. But wouldn't you agree that it is important to only worry about what is truly wrong (rather than fight a battle that doesn't need to be fought)? If you are wrong...you hurt innocent people along the way. That should count for something in your process of determining right from wrong.
You quoted chefs.
I quoted medical professionals.
Your issue is with chefs.
The foie part is your attempt to divert attention away from the emotional sense of unfairness that chefs form an internal clique and view the rest of the non-chefs as outsiders.
I'll agree with you there - chefs are very much in their own professional world...but so is every other profession. The way to solve that is to become a chef. One thing chefs are big on is that you have to pay your dues if you want to have the title, Chef.
Likewise, psychologists determine mental health on a contiuum. It starts with total health - which is to accurately perceive external reality. The opposite end of the spectrum is a complete psychotic break with reality, i.e schizophrenia. Schizophrenics have no ability to perceive reality accurately and their minds literally make things up as they go along - delusions, hallucinations, non-existent voices, etc.
Does your argument stand the reality test? That's all I'm asking. And if it doesn't....what does that say? If investigating the facts is an issue for you....then you're beginning to sound like the end of the spectrum that's breaking from reality. Narcisissm is the first indicator that you've entered that territory.
Lastly - it has to be said. Something is bothering you, but it isn't the treatment of animals. Something is bothering you enough to knock you out of equilibrium and create a minor disturbance. Someone hurt you and you're stuck at that point.
Claudia
@Faust:
"please e-mail Claudia or Skawt for further instructions".
Huhhh? My e-mail to Vince has absolutely nothing to do with you, foie or anything on this particular board, which is why I asked Vincent to e-mail me privately. I also know Skawt's e- to Pardus has nothing to do with you, foie or the discussion at hand - which is why neither of us are trying to tie up the board with something off-topic.
faustianbargain
not all medical professionals. some of them have made themselves irrelevant. especially since the avma(american vet. medical assoc.) doesnt think that gestation crates ought to be banned.
“[M]ost of the association’s policies promote animal industries at the expense of … animal welfare, including promoting practices that cause great harm, pain and unplanned death.” - Peggy Larson, D.V.M.(thats a medical professional for you)
“It is important for each of us to recognize that we may at times become too close to the industries we serve, losing our objectivity about what is the best welfare and adopting instead that suggested by the industry.” - current AVMA President Dr. Bonnie Beaver.
other positions 'medical professionals' have endorsed or havent condemned:
1. face branding of animals before usda dropped the requirement in 1995. avma was silent about it.
2. steel-jaw traps..the same kind used in the fur industry...it is banned in many countries and some states in the usa.
avma on steel jaw traps(after a trapper was added to the avma's animal welfare committee)
“The AVMA recognizes that trapping is a useful and necessary method for managing … populations.”
3. finally, gestation crates for pigs. smithfield has promised to do away with gestation crates, people..but guess what avma has to say about it. nothing. they even proposed to endorse gestation crates..
[..]The veterinarian who proposed the endorsement for gestation crates, Dr. David Madsen, is the AVMA delegate from the American Association of Swine Veterinarians, and he actually admitted in the Journal of the American Veterinary Medical Association that the resolution was a response to animal rights groups’ objections to the use of gestation stalls.[..]
so when 'medical professionals' who work for the farming industries, backed by dollar power...they have very little credibility left. for every 'medical professional' from the avma who wants to endorse gestation crates, there are a few who think that it is cruel.
when avma remains silent about foie gras production, i can assure you that there are medical professionals who havent yet been contacted by the 'industry' who feel that foie gras must be banned.
so, yes..my argument stands the reality test. the misuse of science by scientists isnt anything new. it has happened for decades now and will continue to happen. but science isnt going to strip the human qualities i possess with a few paid-for soundbytes.
faustianbargain
ok, claudia. if you say so.
Jennie/Tikka
I was quoting what is universally accepted anatomy fact - not any particular professions personal physicians. Nobody in any medical profession would argue that a duck brain can do something that there is no physical mechanism for.
I lost count as to how many separate issues you listed in your post, but I will say that again - those are all entirely separate issues that need to be dealt with individually. There is a definite danger in attempting to oversimply something - including what constitutes animal cruelty.
You seem to be making the argument that people who eat foie qualify as guilty of any and all manifestations of other people's cruelty - which again, is irrational.
That makes about as much sense as me saying, "Your screen name contains a reference to Faust so you are secretly trying to say that you are in league with the Devil, hence the reference."
faustianbargain
jennie/tikka: maybe i am confusing you with someone else(could be entirely possible..maybe it was claudia..beats me)...but if you have ever had horses and have trained them(not for the track), you'd know that there are different schools for training and each one of them will criticise the other as 'abusive'. sometimes, following a self proclaimed expert isnt always the way to be...we have to foster our personal relationships with other creatures..if you want to eat what i want to cuddle, we should both have that freedom. and the decency to let the other do what they want..beckoning 'science' into how we feel towards other living beings isnt prudent.
faustianbargain
yes..there are many issues.
regardless of anatomy, foie gras is a sensitive issue. i am sure animals feel no pain when stunned before slaughter. but watching a footage of a stunned cow being dragged upside down isnt going to stop giving pause to many people who might eventually give up eating meat. once again, it is the perception of pain that leads us to the decisions we make. because obviously, neither you or i can feel what a duck feels. you perceive that the duck enjoys it. i dont share your perception. hence the difference in opinions. that doesnt make me wrong just as it doesnt make you right.
re my handle..maybe i just like goethe? or not..its for me to know and for you to guess, i suppose.
Jennie/Tikka
I was beckoning fact into the discussion.
I have chosen to live by the discipline of fact. The heart isn't always right and needs facts to govern it sometimes.
Example: One part of a couple decides that their partner is cheating. There is no evidence that such a thing is happening...its just a feeling one has. Because of this feeling the "injured" partner beats up the other partner and kills the suspected seducer. In reality, nobody was guilty of cheating - it was all in the head & emotions of someone who didn't check into the facts.
My highest value is to not make a mistake in determining reality. I do not make it up as I go along and put myself voluntarily through a lot of rigorous tests to make sure I'm not wrong when I feel right.
While I have never personally raised horses, I do have 2 dogs (who require training), a cat who bit off his own tail as part of some sort of P.T.S.D. manifestation for some event I didn't get to see prior to bringing him home (that required putting him on a human drug: Prozac, for a time), and have been raised by people who lived on a farm the majority of their lives and had to kill the livestock they raised, or not eat. In other words - I have great relationships with animals....my dogs and cat just spent a solid week staying in a pet hotel that was nicer than the one my husband and I stayed in. My animals have their own medical plan, in fact. I cook for them. For a time they had use of their own bedroom in my house - which included their own king size bed.
My nextdoor neighbor growing up had 16 guinea pigs, 2 goats, 3 cats, 1 dog, 3 lizards, 21 desert tortoises, and 14 ducks. I spent every weekend of my life as a kid cleaning out the duck pond. I had a dozen tiny little newborn ducks follow me around the yard like I was mom, but dammit - I'm still gonna buy duck at the grocery store and have it for dinner. Without guilt.
I care about animals.
But I care about reality, too.
Claudia
@Faust:
Yes, I say so. I've pretty much stayed out of this fight, so when I say my e- to another blogger has nothing to do with this issue, it doesn't. I use my real name and my real e-, as most people on this board who know me can verify, and give out both when I want to ask another person about an off-topic issue - as most people who have talked me to me can also verify. So, yes, Faust - you can dial down from insinuating by your qualified "if I say so" that I am involved in some vast, foie-base e-mail jihad with Skawt.
BTW, am I the only one who thinks this topic is being beaten to death? Can't we discuss Heath Putnam's woolly pigs or something, even if they aren't unapologetically French or Francocentric?
Jennie/Tikka
Perception is not fact. Plain and simple.
It is dangerous to make decisions based soley on perceptions. To do so would be a Marketing experts wet dream. We'd be completely vulnerable to whoever had the most impressive ad campagn....and that would be to become a hostage to whoever could produce the strongest emotional reaction (which is exactly what the anti-foie movement is going for).
In short - you are being completely emotionally controlled.
You've fallen for it. Hook, line, & sinker.
Jennie/Tikka
Personally, I'd like to discuss Simon's win and Rubino's loss on Iron Chef this week. I thought Rubino was the better of the two. Anybody else? Comments???
Jennie/Tikka
Humans, at one point in history - perceived the world as flat. Did that make it right? They were deeply angered at the suggestion that the world might indeed be round.
The lady who invented the "Bain Marie" (which is in daily routine usage in kitchens) was excommunicated and executed for her perceived rebellion from God by her new fangled cooking technique.
Perception can be deeply, deeply flawed.
Claudia
I thought Rubino had it, Jen - those Asian flavors looked intriguing - but props to Symon. Thank God no one made rabbit ice cream - although it looked like they came close, with the mousse. Had the hubby twitching a bit. The rabbit "cigars" looked stellar.
Symon's 2 for 2, if I'm not mistaken.
Wilmita
To Faustian Bargain:
Dear Sir or Madam:
I respect your views with regard to a very expensive, NOT widely eaten commodity that is Foie Gras.
While I sympathize and respect your position, I must say as a person of color, I would NOT stand for ANY animal to be elevated above the status I seek to attain and be treated as an equal citizen of the United States of America.
Even though I love, adore and live with animals, (I have pets AND a mammal, er HUSBAND), I resent people putting ANY animals' right to Life, Liberty, etc above my own.
I know how difficult it might be for me, and/or other people of color to move to your neighborhood and live side-by-side. I have experienced this many times before.
PLEASE don't tell me that I don't know what sort of community in which you live. If I am wrong, prove it and I shall stand corrected and apologize publicly.
However, should you not be comfortable with this, then never, NEVER, speak about animal products without proving once and for all you consider people of color above said animals ( of which you have NEVER spoken), on this forum again!
Should you fail to do so, I shall expose you with everything I can to prove with regard to the fact that you would advocate for ANY animal over ANY person of color as an equal to any American citizen.
Insulting Michael Ruhlman, Scott Pardus, Bob del Grasso, Skawt, or any other person who posts here is not acceptable.
Thank you for your consideration in this matter.
Red Beans and Ricely Yours,
Wilmita
SorchaR
Claudia - no. No we can't talk about anything else. Not as long as FB keeps coming around. I'm guessing we could be talking about chocolate and she'd manage to turn it to foie.
Bob delGrosso
Disclaimer and apologia
I have nothing against vegans or vegetarians or anyone who chooses not to consume something because they think it's wrong to do so: as long as they do not attempt to force their diet on other people. And I dare anyone to disclose an instance where I have disparaged anyone who has unaggressively advocated a diet that is free of animal products.
I think if one looks carefully at my record on this he will see that I have only made fun of, ridiculed, lampooned and satirized those who have picketed and vandalized businesses that serve meat (esp. foie gras) or who have tried to put legislation in to place that bans the production, sale or consumption of meat (esp foie gras).
I strongly object to people who try to stop other people from producing or consuming things that have not been proven to be harmful to the public or those who produce or consume whatever those things happen to be. That's my stopping point btw.
I do not want to see animals abused en route to or in the abattoir, but unless their production can be proven to harm the public or the people who raise them or the people who consume them then it's just too bad and too sad for the animals. I hope I do not sound glib here. I work on farm around hundreds of animals, some of them get sick and have to be put down. Some get taken by predators and others go to the abattoir, die by a captive bolt, then I turn them into sausage, salami and other hand made food. It's all very sad and very lovely and a big part of what life is all about for me and many like me.
If you are a vegetarian and believe that you can live a better life than I and escape all this, more power to you. Seriously, I respect your choice. But don't think for a moment that I and millions like me are going to sit back and shut up while you try to legislate what we do out of existence. Ain't happening.
I've written this because I want you all to know that I am aware of the attempts by someone here who posts under a pseudonym to associate my name with opinions that are not mine.
Claudia
Siiiiggghhhh. I guess so, Sorcha. I guess so.
cathelou
Amen, Claudia. This discussion is reminding me of a foie gras liver: bloated, overfed, and sickening if you get too much of it.
cathelou
My apologies for my last post. I meant to stay out of that.
But I did want to discuss an intriguing point Bob del Grosso raised a couple of days ago:
"Point is that it is not good enough to only focus on the quality of ingredients or the steps that one follows while constructing a recipe. It's also important to focus on the totality of the cooking (And eating!) environment and to be aware of things like internal and surface temperatures of foods prior to, during and following cooking.
I may be stating the obvious here, and I certainly mean no condescension, but when you take cooking seriously, it gets very very interesting and very very challenging."
Bob, your post really hit home. I've been cooking since I could reach the stove, but lately, reading this blog and working on my own, I realize I have a lot to learn. I confess that until recently I wouldn’t have known my mis-en-place if I’d spilled my glass of red wine all over it. Still, without knowing the term, I’ve always paid attention to it. (I can hear my mother saying, “Don’t just throw the spoon in the drawer–it goes *here*!”)
My resolution for 2008 is to remedy my own ignorance: learn those French terms and start measuring things on occasion, and maybe even pay attention to where I put my roast when it comes out of the oven. (Looks like Michael R. just made another book sale.)
Still — well, I feel I have to say something in defense of the home(ly) but not necessarily “serious” cook.
The women I grew up with could have bought canned tomatoes and green beans and peaches, but they grew it all and spent most of August, in the South, with no air conditioning, because “store-bought” just wasn’t good enough. (Well, one grandmother did eventually develop a strange fascination with processed food–it was a great novelty for her– but she still dried her own apples and ground her own cornmeal.)
But they were not terribly precise in their cooking–so much depended on the temperature and humidity and the flavor of what came out of the ground. Anyway, as a result, the only way I know how to make a fruit pie is to taste the fruit first, then figure out the amount of sugar and the flavoring. So I’m not comfortable with saying that you have to be exacting and precise to be a “serious” cook, or even that you must know your French terminology–though I’d agree you probably can’t be a chef in a restaurant otherwise.
Actually, I’d argue that there are two kinds of cooks: (and I’ve stolen the terminology from somewhere else, but I can’t remember where). The first are bakers: those who follow recipes, measure things, pay careful attention to temperature, and can tell you the chemistry behind your bread loaf. The second are cooks: those who improvise, wonder what it’s like to substitute duck for chicken in a recipe, and who quit reading a food article when a term like “ferrous oxide” appears. The best are probably a bit of both. And certainly we can learn from both.
Claudia
Cathelou, you've hit the nail on the head - those women cooks you mentioned may have been home cooks, but they were proud home cooks, who put their best effort and attention into their food. Keller and Ruhlman will tell you time and time again - it's about attention, which, by extension, is about giving a hoot - and it's about "finesse" - that extra attention that elevates one's cooking from, say, really damn good to that much better. So, no - those of us who are not professional chefs shouldn't hang our heads in shame or fall on our Wusthofs, as long as we remember the fundamentals: get your "meez" in order and work clean. Pay attention. Give a hoot. Practice finesse. Sounds like you got that message loud and clear. Props to you!
Claudia
P.S.: I don't mean to sound dorky, but I meant to add it's about love, too. In the sense that preparing food to the best of your ability is about caring about the food and the people you serve it to. Might be part of pride, might be part of creativity, but I guess it gets back to caring enough to give it your attention and best effort. (OK, no gagging from the professional chefs among us, please!)
Maya
I promise I will keep this brief.
As a lifelong vegetarian and also veterinary nurse, and now grad student of biology, I have to beg for moderation here. I and many others have clearly stated that people have an absolute right to eat anything they want. It's for survival, and any PETA type laws would reek of dictatorship.
However, it wouldn't kill any of us to think about choosing animal products where the said animal did not have to be crammed into a cage for years and years. I don't object to fois gras as long as the animals can roam free.
Let's not forget that methane is contributing to global warming, and that indeed is something that will harm all of us if we don't fix it. Runoff from farms also pollutes our water supply.
In grad school was the first time I heard the words "water" and "commodity" used together. In other words, before you know it water may be something only the wealthy can afford. That scared me, to say the least. And I'm not just talking about cattle production; rice fields also produce methane emissions.
How fun will cooking and farming be once all the water vanishes from Earth?
Spending five minutes to make good food choices won't kill anyone.
Maya
And in all fairness, since this is a food forum, I have to say that Publisher's Weekly's statement makes me think they may have contributed to the "freedom fries" idea. If in their opinion the book was too "French", why would that be a criticism to begin with?
Bar none, the most incredible, irresistable food I've ever had was French/American cuisine, made with local ingredients. Just because all other nations are jealous of the French it doesn't mean we shouldn't give them credit for their talents.
Connor
Well put, Claudia. There's something so comforting about serving your family and friends food that is carefully thought out and prepared. And it's equally lovely to be on the receiving end of that kind of generosity.
faustianbargain
wilmita, i didnt understand the import of the very many words you typed. please elaborate, if you are so inclined.
to jennie/tikka:
on being emotional:
food IS emotional. perception can be wrong, yes..but it works both ways. the flip side of the coin is that your perception might as well be wrong. while ducks may not have gag reflex, there are other issues with raising thousands of ducks in a farm that are not dissimilar to raising poultry in large numbers.
further, some of the same medical professionals with degrees (although probably different individuals) that you beckon claim that fattened liver is really hepatic lipidosis..which essentially makes foie gras diseased liver or at least, on its way to becoming diseased liver.
human evolution includes the development of empathy. it is this very essential quality that defines our nature. consider this...why do decent 'foodies' and animal lovers alike detest factory farming, crated veal, gestation crates?
not every supporter of foie gras has visited a foie gras farm or a factory farm. neither has every person who detests the practices of the foie gras industry. i would wager that a couple of handful of people have visited hudson valley or sonoma foie gras, yet there is an overwhelming amount of support for foie gras from those who have never seen the practices. and these people dont have the burden of actually having to visit said farms to support them.
but those who do not support the production of foie gras are labelled ignorant of the allegedly 'noble' rearing of ducks by gavage because they havent visited foie gras farms. they must bear the burden of witnessing something they already consider unpleasant, cruel and unacceptable to justify their opinion to others they disagree with anyways at the risk of being labelled emotional and narcissitic...and other characterisations that were made.
why the double standard? what does one call the emotion that foie gras supporters display when they unquestioningly and faithfully drink every word uttered by the few dozen handfuls of people who have had the invitiation to visit foie gras farms?
touching, isnt it..this trust and faith? what do you call the emotion displayed by some who are desperate to find 'humaneness' and 'nobility' in the food they eat regardless of whether or not they have personally witnessed it. so, at some level, anyone who supports foie gras production practices without visiting foie gras farms are also taking a stance based on emotions. very human emotions indeed...different from the emotional basketcases who try to fight for the rights of ducks and cows and chickens...but still emotions nevertheless.
the perception about the cruelty of foie gras stems not just from emotional issues, but from deeper questions.
fact: geese migrate and gorge themselves before a migratory flight.
fact: waterfowl has no gag reflex.
but there are other questions:
a. do sterile, male mulard ducks migrate?
b. if they do indeed migrate, can they take flight in their natural habitat if their livers are enlarged 6-10 times?
c. traditional foie gras gavage used to include pureed apples and pounded walnuts in france. going even further back, they were fed figs and acorns. how close to tradition is corn mush with the inclusion of (duck?)fat?
d. what is 'small scale'? what are the numbers?
the traditional principle behind animal husbandry is to allow an animal to live most of its lifespan as naturally as possible in it's native habitat and to use the remanants of its being for some of the needs humans cannot do without. does the meat industry and specifically the foie gras industry reflect this traditional idea?
to ask these questions is rational and logical. it is introspective and not narcissistic. it is necessary. upon introspection, there might be some emotion involved and perhaps for some, passion. for a few others, a passion that unfortunately can become recklessly entwined with their crusading cause, the violent results of which we have witnessed in the past. the main reason many people abstain from consuming meat is introspection and not emotion. the emotions...the reason why people act and react.. are a mere side effect of said introspection.
further expanding, everything about food and eating is emotional, dont you think? every family meal..every instance of comfort food you have ever enjoyed...every recipe someone has painstakingly reproduced from their childhood memories for the next generation...from the last piece of chocolate cake we stuff ourselves with while we are wallowing in misery(or pms for rest of us) to the breaking of bread around a communal table..every celebratory meal..every religious feast...everything about food is emotional and ritualistic. i find it odd that anyone would want to eliminate emotion from what we put in our mouths. it is this very emotion that defines us...it defines the gluttons and the gourmands....the bulimics and the anorexics...the 'foodie' and the 'chef'.
should we be ashamed of being emotional? for wanting to leave this world a better place than it was when we first came. i feel no shame. i am not stopping any of you from eating what you want. i certainly dont want anything to be banned. i dont want to convert anyone. just dont insult the intelligence of others with 'facty'justifications for your food choices which are easily disputed and proved wrong. this whole exercise is not to tell you that you have to become like me. it is to drive home the point that the many arguments that attempt to make foie gras 'humane', 'natural' and its production, 'traditional' and 'small scale' can be easily struck down because they are simply not true. of course, the most important point i am trying to make here is that the heart and the stomach is connected. we cannot look at our food without emotion or attachment.
there is an urgent need to eliminate false information that is used as justification for the abuse and illtreatment of domestic animals. like calling modern foie gras production 'humane', 'noble', 'traditional', 'small scale', 'natural' etc...like trying to tackle the false accusations thrown against those i consider like minded people when it comes to animal welfare like the villification of chef trotter. like trying to understand why the medical professionals who rightly say that waterfowl have no gag reflex are given more credibility than the medical professionals(with the same degree) who say that foie gras is a by product of a diseased liver or an ailing liver. if foie gras can stand on its own merit and without dispute, it is the triumph of free markets. so it goes.
i promise you...and this, i say without a shred of doubt in my mind...there are a scarce few in our living world who would enjoy their food when it comes with the knowledge that it is the product of pain or suffering or grief. since noone can feel how another living creature really feels, perception does play a very important role. and emotion colours it, not because we discount medical professionals' opinion(no matter how dubious or divided it may be), but because nutrition becomes a part of our very own being. tainted food taints our very being...in more ways than one. and thats why people are willing to pay double or tripe the price for organic and free range products. and that is why words like 'humane' and 'compassionate'entered the food lexicon.
so, yes..there are some who wont just eat anything off a plate. i completely support your right to eat anything..from foie gras to whale meat to endangered fish. i dont like it, but who can stop you from eating that except yourself? it is unrealistic and irrational and plain wrong to expect the govt to interfere with my sense of morality and ethics. but *I* ...and by that, i speak for myself...do not see products like foie gras or veal or whalemeat or a surfeit of meat/animal flesh/fish, farmed or otherwise as sustainable or ethically robust choices in our future...in my future..i.e. in my lifetime, it will become an unsustainable choice. and this wont be because of governments or legislations or animal rights activists.
it will disappear because of sheer economics of the matter. our world population is increasing. land is fast becoming a precious commodity. water is going to become the most precious commodity in a few decades. forget about black gold...water will become liquid gold. there is going to be no revolution to bring things back to sustainable levels...the reversal to a simpler, earth friendly agricultural world must happen before things explode. but the damage that would have happened before the wrongs are righted will be the responsibility of those who extoll the virtues of the an orgy of dining. there was a reason foie gras was prized..why it was expensive..why the production of it was truly small scale. now, it is a full blown industry of its own. years from now, we will be evaluating and re-evaluating what could have been done. let it not be said that nobody tried. i did
Jennie/Tikka
Hepatic lipidosis is entirely reversible - cirrhosis is liver death...those are entirely different stages of a fatty liver (check your facts better).
You simply cannot claim that a non-fact is true. Without fact-checking you can claim that ANYthing is true. Your faith in something does NOT make it actually true.
Why is it you want this to be true so very badly - despite the medical evidence? What do you get out of?? Who's approval are you seeking??
Jennie/Tikka
Its steatosis, more accurately. And there is no physical mechanism for the duck/goose to feel itself in such a condition.
It takes an enormous battery of blood tests to discover it in human beings. Discovering it in a duck - with a brain the size of a walnut - would be even more difficult. For it to know it was in pain you'd have to find that something was going on in the duck's anterior cingulate gyrus - if it even has one.
faustianbargain
hmm..did i say it was liver death? i said diseased liver.
that it is reversible is irrelevant. its like saying cancer is reversible or vasectomies are reversible. while it may be reversible, it is still a state of ill health while it is present.
i cannot understand your point?
all birds need to preen and groom themselves. they live as tight social groups and need to waddle in the water..hence they are called 'water' fowl..get it? over feeding them and kept in stalls(or barns or whatever) leads to many problems..ruptured stomachs, ruptured esophagus, susceptability to pneumonia, spleen damage...extremely compromised health and mental states. if you can tell me which medical professional disputes all of this and has actually witnessed the thousands of foie gras ducks in the last stages before they are killed in a physically healthy condition, please give me the name. i'll tackle this professional myself and will keep you posted on the 'facts'.
Jennie/Tikka
Here's the dealio on pain.
For a human being to know its in pain, certain things have to happen. Certain cells in the skin have to be stimulated. Notice I said "skin." There are no receptors inside a body to pick up those signals. That sends a signal along the trigeminal nerve to a ascending relay system in the human brain. To actual feel the pain, a descending path has to be activated. That requires the emotional component from the anterior cingulate gyrus (below the cortex). The signals can be blocked from making the return path out of the brain, indicating pain. Analgesics and opiates block that (which is why you take aspirin).
Now, for a duck to do the same it has to have the very same structures in it's walnut-size brain. How likely it is needs to be investigated, but the outcome is pretty predictable.
ntsc
Perhaps FB is a sleeper agent for the factory farms and simply trying to lead the mob against something that sounds terrible, in the hope that the mob will stay away from them.
Fast food forever
faustianbargain
so, now you are saying that ducks feel no pain when overfeed and their livers are gorged. that the symptoms while alive and the autopsy reports after death mean nothing at all? please elaborate.
Jennie/Tikka
Its the same thing I've been saying all before now. I know what makes it possible for a human being to sense pain. I know that animal brains are far less complex. I know that a similar or identical structure would have to be present for a duck to sense pain. You cannot sense pain if you do not have a mechanism - the same way a paraplegic or quadraplegic does not feel pain in the body areas that have a cut nerve. The same way that people with leprosy no longer have the capability to sense pain.
faustianbargain
let me get this clear..you are saying that:
a. the foie gras ducks feel no pain.
b. that medical professionals have attested to this 'fact'.
c. there is no physical or emotional* toll/stress on an animal after three weeks of force feeding
*if you want to argue that animals feel no emotion, i'll tack that up as point 'd'.
Jennie/Tikka
They're "under stress" in the wild, too. Believe it or not - they are hunted by other animals and constantly have that to be "stressed" about.
For a duck to feel emotions it would have to have a brain that made that possible....which requires a whole lot more grey/white matter than just a walnut sized dolop of not very specialized cells.
faustianbargain
but we are not speaking of wild birds. it is my understanding that you are claiming(with medical evidence, i hope) that foie gras ducks feel no pain or stress or experience the ill effects of a diseased physical state when they are being reared in foie gras farms and while being forcefed towards the end of their lives. am i right?
Jennie/Tikka
I am quoting myself. I was a biopsychology major at a private university. I have personally dissected animal brains looking for specific structures. I have not dissected a duck or goose brain because I have had no reason to. I know enough about brain structure and anatomy to make an educated response to the current medical research. I am not the final word - but you are going to have to prove me wrong to get me to believe you.
Maya
There are at least 3 parts of the brain that are involved in pain sensations - the amygdala is one of them. An animal that cannot feel pain cannot survive as pain keeps living beings from seriously injuring themselves - it's an adaptation. Just because it is convenient to think that these animals aren't miserable doesn't mean that it's a fact.
You can be assured that any animal that moves about does feel pain. Plants cannot move or get themselves into trouble so they do not need such sensations.
In addition, birds do not show symptoms of pain or illness, that is also an adaptation. Ask any bird owner or vet, one minute they're up and about, the next minute they're dead. It's worth noting that while I was in college we learned to force feed many healthy animals, and one technician was force-feeding a healthy rat and it died during the procedure. How it died I'm not sure, but in the hands of the wrong person I think that force feeding could be a pretty lousy experience.
No disrespect intended towards those who don't agree with me, just a friendly debate here. 🙂
It's also worth saying that the growth of farms means lots of deforestation. Many new medicines are being discovered that may cure cancer or other terrible diseases, but at this rate all the trees and plants will be wiped out before we can discover these wonderful medicines.
All the more reason to be aware of what you're buying.
Jennie/Tikka
No disrespect from me either. I definitely believe its going to have to be cold hard science that finally answers this issue - and not emotions.
I'm really not sure that all animals have amygdala - that might be a stretch. I will, however - look that up because an amygdala would be signifcant.
But, I will pose this - if the amygdala is merely tapping into the pre-existent instincts against predators, that's different from pulling from emotional memories, isn't it?
Jennie/Tikka
I'm going to keep up on this discussion with this caveat:
I'm officially on stand-by here in L.A. County with both the Red Cross and the Fire Department and may have to go running out the door if we're getting hammered as bad as San Fran and Napa have been hit with this storm. So if I don't post right away - be patient.
faustianbargain
i understand...we are expecting that it will be over by tonight or at the most, tomorrow.
back to the topic of ducks and pain and your perception that they dont feel any....essentially, that one is closed, yes?
something you said made me think though..
you said:"They're "under stress" in the wild, too. Believe it or not - they are hunted by other animals and constantly have that to be "stressed" about."
as would chickens and cows and pigs be hunted and be stressed in the wild. so why so much respect for temple gradin? why all the humane standards for cows and lamb and pigs? why are the others working so hard to get rid of battery cages and towards keeping the animals we eat in a less unpleasant place before it gets to the chopping block?
if we are going to start comparing the state of animals we raise for food to those in the wild, we should probably give up rearing animals for food and start hunting in the woods for meat?
so why not for foie gras ducks? they are surely not different from our chickens and pigs and cows, no?
faustianbargain
jennie/tikka: may i recommend peter singer's books to you?
Maya
Hi Jennie!
I have not taken the ornithology class yet (the professor is like a really mean bear LOL! I'm a bit nervous about that one)so let me know what you find when you look it up! From my tech experience I think birds have a different nomenclature, although some scientists use the word amygdala or pallias amygdala in birds.
Here are some links:
http://www.annalsonline.org/cgi/content/abstract/1016/1/77
http://hisnibs.blogspot.com/2005/02/new-york-times-science-minds-of-their.html
You've asked a really good question, and my answer would be rather lame LOL. Mostly I take the lazy way out and if it seems to me like any kind of food practice has any chance whatsoever of putting an animal through misery I simply choose to skip it.
Avian neurobiology is a hot field right now, though! Over 60 percent of our biology master's students are going into ornithology.
I once heard someone say, "Even if a bat could tell you what it's like to be a bat, we still wouldn't understand." I think that sums it up; other animals expereince life so differently than ourselves, their experience of pain, happiness, etc is probably very different than ours.
The key is form and function. A lobster did not evolve to vote or to drive a car, they evolved to live in their ocean environment. They are not "more" or "less" intelligent than us, they are adapted to the environment in which they live, and to contribute to the ecosystem and keep our Earth healthy.
While animals are facinating, I think it would take one heck of a lot of brain scans to understand their experience. I prefer to keep it simple and at least buy animal products where the critters live a rustic farm life if such a thing still exists.
And if you get an answer about the " bird brains", I'd be facinated to hear about it - might give me a head start in class! LOL! 😉
Maya
ps Hi Faustian and Bob del G!! 🙂
Jennie/Tikka
Faust - I'm checking into Singer as we speak. Will get back to you on that one.
Back to pain. Pain is the overstimulating of 4 specialized cells that detect heat/cold/pressure/or rupture. The overwhelming amount of those cells in people is in the skin....and I'll make the assumption in ducks as well. So sure - something breaking the skin (like a predator biting into it) would hurt.
Stress in a human includes thinking about the stressor. We have frontal lobe areas that give us "executive functions" like thought. Animals have limited or no frontal lobe. Lobotomize a human and you'll see a human who's more animal-like. The lower the life form, the less thought - the more instinct. Instinct is a pre-existing piece of information the animal is born with...its genetically passed on. It sees a predator and the part of its brain that stores that aversion kicks in and the bird freaks out. It doesn't have to think about it. That happens whether or not the duck has had an actual bad experience to rely upon or not...it just happens.
Pain in internal organs is really really really complicated, in humans. In animals its really questionable how much is going on. Clearly they don't want to die but that's due to instinct, not thought. They can't form the thought, "Hey - I better seek out a vet" when they're ill, or, "Who will take care of my ducklings with me dead?" They do come pre-wired with, "Don't die - die BAD. Live GOOD." And, "If you give me food - you're my friend." That could extend to, "If you give me LOTS of food - I REALLY like you."
Happy well-fed animals that go to slaughter taste better - Gordon Ramsay can attest to that, since he did that little experiment in his own backyard.
What we're saying here is that this IS humane treatment for the ducks, as they would be skinnier and more stressed in the wild - as opposed to having guaranteed shelter, food, and protection from predators in captivity. I'm not sure how you could even improve things for them - they're already well cared for.
And Maya - I'll let you know what I find out. Hopefully I'll get to spend my weekend at home (in front of my fireplace and computer) and not working a shelter instead!
How animals are treated prior to slaughter bothers me, too. In some cases I purchase meats that are Halal from an Islamic butcher rather than at my supermarket. At least they're trying to be humane about it all.
faustianbargain
hey maya...:)
faustianbargain
jennie/tikka said: "What we're saying here is that this IS humane treatment for the ducks, as they would be skinnier and more stressed in the wild - as opposed to having guaranteed shelter, food, and protection from predators in captivity. I'm not sure how you could even improve things for them - they're already well cared for."
but the problem is that many animals..including cows, pigs, chicken and ducks..ARE bred for the specific purpose of animal husbandry. will they be stressed in the wild? maybe, but they develop adaptations to deal with that stress.
your point is moot as many of the thousands and thousands of ducks and chickens..(remember foie gras comes from sterile male mulard ducks that are cross bred for this specific purpose)...wouldnt even exist in the first place if there isnt an exaggerated demand for meat and other animal products. i cannot stress this point enough. i feel the urge to repeat it over and over again, but i am sure you got my point.
in the wild, there is a balance. and there are a lot more casualities involved in a farm that literally breeds thousands and thousands of birds every year. they are all not 'well taken care of'...legally, perhaps. and if i am not mistaken, the law only asks that a bird must have at least 3 sq.ft of space...at least to spread its wingspan. remember ducks are birds that fly...they need water..they need to waddle..they need to preen and groom themselves...they need light..they need fresh air. regardless of what those who have 'visited' these farms tell you, when the numbers creep towards the thousands, it is not an natural environment for these birds.
there is only so much the environment can bear...and for now, this is the only planet we've got.
Jennie/Tikka
Well, but the same can be said for dogs as well. Most of the breeds we have today wouldn't have existed without intentional breeding done by people. Dogs don't seem to be any worse-the-wear for it.
Also, take into consideration that with the global population as high as it is - there simply isn't enough room to allow these animals free roaming. If we did, then after 5 o'clock at night we'd all be out with shotguns looking for dinner....which wouldn't be good.
faustianbargain
what do you mean dogs 'dont seem to be any worse the wear for it'? are you having dogs for dinner? have you been to an animal shelter lately? do you hve any idea how many animals are abandoned and discarded? have you witnessed the perversities of puppy mills?
what exactly is your point? come again?
faustianbargain
jennie/tikka said: "Also, take into consideration that with the global population as high as it is - there simply isn't enough room to allow these animals free roaming. If we did, then after 5 o'clock at night we'd all be out with shotguns looking for dinner....which wouldn't be good."
good grief, woman! they dont hve to roam around freely if THEY ARE NOT BRED INTENTIONALLY IN LARGE NUMBERS IN THE FIRST PLACE!
Jennie/Tikka
I give up, Faust - seriously. I've spelled it out in the neatest and most understandable terms. I've boiled avian neurology down into simple terms and you still missed it.
What exactly is YOUR point? I haven't found it, except that you're just seriously unhappy with just about everything.
I will say this, lastly. There is clearly something wrong with your human mammalian brain. There is a short-circuit that jumps to, "People are bad unless they are just like me". Do a quick search through history and look for the people who shared that opinion with you...you'll find history's biggest criminals.
Wilmita
To Faustian Bargain:
No, I do NOT care to elaborate for two reasons:
First, my meaning was QUITE clear and,
Second, if my meaning was NOT understood by you, I must advise that it is against my principles to get into a battle of wits with an unarmed opponent.
Carry on!
Wilmita
faustianbargain
oops caps lock was on..
jennie/tikka said:"I give up, Faust - seriously. I've spelled it out in the neatest and most understandable terms. I've boiled avian neurology down into simple terms and you still missed it."
but you didnt prove that birds dont feel pain. it didnt prove that the conditions in cramped conditions are unnatural as a bird's habitat.
i only recall you saying.."I was a biopsychology major at a private university. I have personally dissected animal brains looking for specific structures. I have not dissected a duck or goose brain because I have had no reason to. I know enough about brain structure and anatomy to make an educated response to the current medical research. I am not the final word - but you are going to have to prove me wrong to get me to believe you."
that doesnt prove anything. on the other hand, there is evidence that foie gras ducks have been subjected to horrific treatment that has ended up with ruptured internal organs, infections, pneumonia, liver disease and ultimately death before slaughter.
jennie/tikka:"What exactly is YOUR point? I haven't found it, except that you're just seriously unhappy with just about everything."
i have said it many many times in this comment thread and i dont mind saying it again.
1. foie gras production is not compatible with ethical or humane animal husbandry.
2. there is no proof that breeding of sterile ducks hat have never known to migrate or gorge themselves prior to migratory flights occurs in nature.
3. modern foie gras production is neither 'small scale' or 'natural' or 'artisan'. turns out that it is not traditional either.
4. the justification for foie gras production can come only from its consumers who desire foie gras for it's taste and texture. foie gras as we know it does not occur in nature. at all.
5. there is no proof that ducks dont feel no pain or that they dont suffer physical or emotional distress while they are being bred and raised in foie gras farm factories.
jennie/tikka said: "I will say this, lastly. There is clearly something wrong with your human mammalian brain. There is a short-circuit that jumps to, "People are bad unless they are just like me".
i am not saying "People are bad unless they are just like me". i have never said that. i have never said that. you are simply putting words into my mouth because you are running out of chances to come up with a logical rebuttal.
i am critical and skeptical about the alleged 'humaneness' of foie gras production. i am judgemental about those who consume it. but i dont think that 'people are bad'. on the other hand, i believe in people and that there is always hope...that for every ten of those who will swallow the foie gras industry propoganda, there will be at least one who will think twice before ordering foie gras. and that is more person who will think.
jennie/tikka said: "Do a quick search through history and look for the people who shared that opinion with you...you'll find history's biggest criminals."
gandhi? da vinci? goodall?
on the 'miserable and abandoned'...the "abortion that was spurned, kicked and trampled upon"...the husband said it better
"If the use of animal food be, in consequence, subversive to the peace of human society, how unwarrantable is the injustice and the barbarity which is exercised toward these miserable victims. They are called into existence by human artifice that they may drag out a short and miserable existence of slavery and disease, that their bodies may be mutilated, their social feelings outraged. It were much better that a sentient being should never have existed, than that it should have existed only to endure unmitigated misery;" - P.B.Shelley
Jennie/Tikka
"Logical rebuttal?"
But my PERCEPTION is that you said these things, ergo - it is true. My PERCEPTION of the matter is that you are a terrible person, ergo it is TRUE. I don't need facts - I have my emotional perceptions....ergo, I can say anything I want to say; is that not your stance?
You're going to have to learn to take it if you're going to dish it out, Bargain.
Life won't be pretty for you.
Vincent
It seems that I check this post now like one of my pantry/garde chicks do their telenovelas...oh the drama that is unfolding.
Bigger words though.
cathelou
Claudia, I liked what you said about good food preparation being about love. Interestingly, I seem to remember that in even Tony Bourdain (in Kitchen Confidential) writes that his favorite meal is a something home-cooked, no matter how plain, if done with care and attention.
And I suspect that the really great chefs have that love too.
faustianbargain
to jennie/tikka: perhaps your perception of me is true to you(you know..as in relative and absolute truth), but you still havent given me any reason to consider any of the 'facts' re foie gras and its production methods as humane/traditional/small-scale/artisan/natural etc.
Jennie/Tikka
"Is this the region, this the soil, the clime?" said then the lost archangel. "This the seat that we must change for heaven? This mournful gloom? for that celestial light?
Be it so.
Since, He, who is now Sovreign, can dispose and bid what shall be right. Furthest from Him is best, whom reason hath equalled, force hath made supreme above His equals. Farewell, happy fields, where joy forever dwells! Hail, horrors! Hail, Infernal World! And thou, profoundest hell, receive thy new possessor --
one who brings a mind not changed by place or time.
The mind is its own place, and in itself can make heaven of hell, a hell of heaven."
Satan, from Milton's "Paradise Lost"
Adele
Vincent, you're right; this thread is like a telenovela (or a train wreck -- I'm not sure); I check it a couple of times a day and watch the posts grow. It was at 234 this morning and now 272!
A couple of comments: FB, do you know that a definition of insanity is repeating the same action but expecting different results. Post wherever you want, but why would you think you'd convert anyone on this blog? Maybe it's time for you to get another hobby. Wilmita, I, too, though an omnivore, love my pets and am pretty much a sap for most animals, but one of my favorite quotes is either from Dylan Thomas or Brendan Behan (both died of the drink; they get jumbled in my mind), "I respect kindness to humans more than I respect kindness to animals."
I remember some weeks ago, when Michael was talking about his book tour, he said that he'd always thought that chefs were among the most generous, entertaining people, he knew, and he'd come to feel that about the folks, who came out to see him. That's how I feel about most of you -- I'm even learning avian physiology, and I've had many laughs.
Happy New Year to all, and Jennie/Tikka, I hope you don't get slammed with that Sierra Nevada storm.
Adele
faustianbargain
jennie/tikka: how odd that you should quote milton's paradise lost after i quoted shelley who penned prometheus unbound...a nobler rebel than milton's satan. whatever made you pick that one..truly perplexing.
to adele who quoted someone she couldnt remember.."I respect kindness to humans more than I respect kindness to animals."
adele, denying foie gras is cruel and being unkind of human beings? how droll..
Ms.Anthrope
Adele said:
Post wherever you want, but why would you think you'd convert anyone on this blog?
Well, actually, she did...up until now, I really didn't care if I ever had foie gras...not for any ethical reason...it just didn't appeal to me. After slogging through all of this drama, it seems to me that there must be something pretty damned special about it. I don't know if the local bowling alley does foie...but if so...I'm on it!
BTW-Storm update...things are fairly quiet on the coast right now. Expecting more in the night and through tomorrow. All things considered, I think we did OK.
carri
Ms. Anthrope, I'm with you! Now, let's talk about chocolate! (does it go with foie?)
ntsc
Well, personally if I've started a meal with foie, I would rather end it with a cheese plate, perhaps a flight of blue.
However there is something to be said for chocolate. For Thanksgiving I did a four layer chocolate cake with homemade rasberry jam filling and a ganach frosting, which my wife made a rasberry/white chocolate ice cream to accompany. the under 10 set was fascinated.
cathelou
Vincent, you're right on! It's like when I turn on the TV intending to watch PBS and something like "Wife Swap" is on, and I CAN'T SEEM TO TURN IT OFF.
Except, as you said, they don't usually talk about Shelley and Milton on "Wife Swap." (Should I add that "Prometheus Unbound" is arguably the most pretentious, blathering, and pompous poem in the English language? Probably not.)
cathelou
NTSC, the cake and the ice cream sound amazing. If I'd been there, I'd have been sitting with the under 10 set in jaw-dropped awe.
Maya
From several of the comments I've read here I feel tempted to ask a question: what exactly makes a human life any more valuable than an animal's life?
I've never heard a logical answer to this. I hear people say, "humans are smarter", which is not a logical reason. I've heard people say, "oh, so if some kid was getting attacked by a dog you would save the dog??" No, of course not.
But theoretically, why is an animal's life less "precious" than a human's? I have no problem with people eating meat, as long as they try to find humanely raised animals. But making animals suffer for some luxury food which could easily be replaced by some more humane trendy food just baffles me.
Again, no disrespect intended.
I'm glad the California folks here are okay, looked like a terrible storm!!! 😉
Ms.Anthrope
Maya, I don't believe there IS a logical answer.
I am in full agreement that animals raised for slaughter should be treated as humanely as possible, but my idea of humane treatment isn't necessarily what anyone else's is. So where DO we draw the line? I certainly don't know.
What I do to ease my own conscience is purchase meat from a local market where they get thier meat from 4H and FFA projects. I know they probably had a better life than one raised in a large factory farm operation. Do I know that for fact? No...but at least it's a start.
Jennie/Tikka
Love for animals....or - and here comes the painful truth: hatred for human beings.
Love for animals and love for human beings aren't mutually exclusive attitudes...it isn't one or the other. Yet, "animal lovers" constantly have to ask the rather CHILLING question:"Why is human life valuable, anyways?" So what's really going on here?
A defense mechanism.
A hatred for people has to be disguised because it is socially unacceptable. It is personally unacceptable too and registers as guilt in the emotions. To compensate for the hatred a new love has to emerge - to neutralize the guilt. Enter the extreme animal activist and their crusade.
"But look how loving I am!" screams the animal activist.
Does that love include people?
When you vandalize a restaurant because it serves food you don't approve of: That's hatred of people (not love for animals).
When you destroy a car dealership because the cars don't meet with your approval: That's hatred for people (not love for the environment).
When you attempt to put businesses out of existence: That's not love for animals - its hatred for people.
If you cared about people you'd show it in your activities.
But you can't show what you don't have.
Wilmita
Oh, boy!
Jennie, you NAILED it!
Wilmita
Tags
My next post will be the freight-train-of-consciousness that is the anthology of Faustian Bargain's posts on this thread alone.
Tags
No it won't... the 44 (many with many pages) posts she has made so far won't fit into a single post. It's just as well.
Thank you for your attention, and remember:
Please don't feed the bandwidth-hogging trolls.
Maya
Hi Jennie!
I'm confused, did someone post those comments here? I'm assuming you were talking about me, but just like with Faustian you twisted my words beyond recognition!
I never, ever asked "Why is human life valueable"? In fact, I intimated that I would not "save" a dog who was attacking a person.
Maybe I should have been more clear, Jennie. I apologize. Human life always comes before an animal's life. If someone wants to kill an animal for food, I believe they have the absolute, undeniable right to. If an animal bites a person, that animal should be destroyed. Immediately.
If a person comes face to face with a bear, and the bear is not hauling ass in the other direction, and is intimidating, that person has the absolute right to blast the bear in the face with a shotgun.
When I worked for the MSPCA I personally killed 800 young, healthy, happy, wonderful cats and dogs. Do you know why? Because people were moving to Florida, because their kids refused to care for it, because their new boyfriend did not like cats. I dragged all those animals to the euthanasia room and killed them so people could have their freedom.
And I'm pretty astonished by your assumption that I was involved with criminal activities. Would you like my address so you can send the cops? Because if I did those things I need to be sent to prison.
All I said was, philisophically, why is a human life more valueable than a human's? Why, after killing all those animals, should I not ask people to have more compassion? That's all!
😉
Maya
I forgot Ms. Anthrope, who actually answered my philisophical question! Sorry!
I completely agree with you. All most animal rights activists really want is a bit of thoughtfulness. Real activists, that is. PETA does not represent most professional animal caregiver's real values. Many of us eat meat, wear leather etc.
Finding the most humanely raised meat in your area is amazing. That's all you need to do and as far as I'm concerned you have a clear conscience.
The only other big problem is environmental problems, which means we may have to cut down on meat, but will farms be replaced by Walmart? Hmmmm.... 😉
Bob delGrosso
Maya
Foie gras is not a luxury food. Not to me at least.
It is just "food" and it is one member of the large constellation of ingredients that francophilic chefs like myself use in the pursuit of our craft. We also use all of the other edible parts of the ducks.
In my experience it is usually others, people who are not avocational Eurocentric chefs, who imbue foie gras with the quality of "luxury." For the rest of us, it is just another delicious ingredient that we try to honor by not mucking it up with unnecessary seasoning while showcasing it's unique identity or "isness," if you will.
BTW, I don't think there is any right opinion about this subject, neither do I think that there is a wrong opinion. If someone wants to believe that fioe gras is a luxury food well then, to them it is. And if I want to think about it as something that is "food" and not essentially different from a banana or a glass of milk then, who is anyone to tell me that I cannot?
Some of the people who post here seem so desperate to be right. It's as if no one has ever taken them seriously and damnit, they just aren't going to give up until everyone agrees with them.
I liked your question about why human life is are generally considered to be more valuable than animal life. I don't think this is a question that can be answered directly. Rather I think the best response is an analogous question posed as a hypothetical situation.
You are walking with your child when you come upon a grizzly bear and her cub. You are carrying a 50 caliber rifle. The mother grizzly charges at your child. Do you shoot the mother bear knowing that her cub will die in the wild? Or do you sacrifice your child, run, and let the bears live?
Maya
HEY BOB!
It's been a long time! Nothing new here, but I'm (somewhat) enjoying the major challenges of grad school and hoping to earn a decent living once I get out!
Re: your comments, I agree about not trying to be right, I do so desperately need to work on my humility. If you read my previous comments you'll see that I already answered your grizzly bear question quite clearly. If one was coming after me, my (theoretical) child, another human or even my cat, they would be a dead doggie. As for the cub, I'm a licensed wildlife rehabber so I would rehab it if I could catch it, otherwise it would be a dead doggie too.
Sorry, I was not very specific when I said "luxury" food, I just meant that we can usually choose a food that has been humanely raised. If the ducks are free roaming then that's entirely different than being crammed into a cage for years and years.
I'll see you at your blog, my friend! Happy belated holidays!! 😉
faustianbargain
to jennie/tikka: right then...HAVE YOU GIVEN YOURSELF A PAT ON THE BACK for that brilliant theory, darling? very original!
i must also add that i have never had any qualms about expressing it in crystal clear terms when i dont like someone from the human species. some of them are pond scum anyways and depending on the circumstances, i probably wont be tripping over myself to save their arses either. shocking, but true. i am sure it is not difficult to swallow this.
but hey!! thats an awesome speech anyways. you NAILED "something" indeed. you must print it out and frame it or something.
to bob degrosso: a duck is not a grizzly bear and while they can get a tad nasty, i doubt if they can cause loss of life or limb. what a bizarre parallel you guys have drawn.
to maya: a three year old cocker spaniel that has been rehomed thrice now is now under the care of a canine behaviour specialist because he has a worrisome biting habit. possibly rage syndrome. all because some arsehold breeder thought it was ok to keep breeding them and kept reproducing the aggressive gene of a show line dog. the dog will probably have to be euthanised if the specialist cant figure out why he is the way he is ...because of someone else somewhere at sometime also thought that 'dogs dont seem to be any worse the wear for it' and kept breeding them indiscriminately for profit.
so..yea...i'd probably make the hard decision to destroy the dog because he is too dangerous to be around people..and i can live with that...but i think the person who caused it to happen ought to burn in hell..possessing human DNA doesnt mean that they ought to get a free pass. stupidity and malice seems to be hardwired stubbornly into some humans' DNA anyways.
Claudia
Whether you are pro-foie or anti-, I think this argument has gone way over the line and for far too long.
Neither foie faction is going to change the others' mind, so why not give the topic a rest? It's been beaten, whipped, and pureéd into a smooth paté already, and the tone of the discussion has been both belligerent and personal from the get-go. This board is becoming a one-note topic. Let's move on, shall we?
As intelligent, erudite, articulate and learned as some folks might be, this blog has degenerated into a screed-laden soapbox from which individuals are launching rabid diatribes on their personal, political or social agendas. It is getting tiresome - and worse - it is getting self-indulgent and nacissistic.
Ruhlman's blog is one of the best - if not THE best - food blog on the Web. People not only read it, but cross-reference and cross-link it every freaking day. Let's try and keep that in mind before anyone decides to indulge in yet another 20 column inches of what can only be termed "look at me - aren't I clever" vitriol. Enough, already. I can't speak for the entire community, but I can't be the only one exhausted by this telenova (thank you, Vincent.) There are others on this blog, you know - it's not about one person, one issue, and a need to "Don Quixote" one's position into the ground.
OK< that's long enough for me, too.
Jennie/Tikka
I'd answer you, FB - but I'm too busy dealing with the sheltering situation in Nevada - people AND animals.
And that, my dear - is the difference between you and me. I dislike you intensely but if you needed an emergency shelter (completely with food, medical care, psychological care and financial assistance), I'd provide you with one, no questions asked (even though you clearly don't deserve it).
Tags
I think Claudia's right. No need to get personal.
And keep the bulk-rate bombshells to a minimum.
faustianbargain
fine, claudia.
i will get back to a few issues...the same set that i have been asking right from the beginning before all the nonsense.
but first:
1. the breed of duck that is used to produce foie gras doesnt exist in nature. a mulard has never flown to migrate..a mulard never gorged itself to enlarge the store of fat in its liver by itself in anticipation of a harsh winter. and a mulard certainly didnt evolve on corn mush.
2. traditional foie gras was made from geese. they were fed pureed apples and pounded walnuts..not corn mush with 'duck fat'.
3. if foie gras is a by product of migratory water fowl, can the current residents of foie gras farms migrate or even fly?
4. thousands of foie gras ducks are brought into existence and killed every year in the farms...and 'small scale' foie gras production in france used to be no more than half a dozen or at the most a dozen per farm. how is this foie gras industry 'small scale'?
5. ducks are killed before they reach adulthood. they dont get to preen or waddle. they do not lead a 'natural' life as their natures made them. how is foie gras production natural when even the feeding of the ducks is done with tubes...rubber or metal is irrelevant..the point is that it involves gavage.
6.some have argued that ducks dont feel 'pain'. i think they may be confusing gavage with actual pain that birds, as do most living things, feel.
7. it seems to me that foie gras production is a large scale industrial farm venture. it is a process that is unnatural and involves real meddling. it veers away a lot from 'traditional' foie gras production.
keeping in mind that i do not want everyone to become vegan..that i dont want foie gras banned..that i dont think businesses should be shut down or restaurants be vandalised...please consider why the lobbyists and PR firms hired by the foie gras industry is lying to the general public that foie gras is 'traditional', 'small scale', 'natural' and 'humane'.
it doesnt seem much different from industrial battery chicken/egg production. there is nothing illegal about consuming a product that is not unlike battery chicken..it is still acceptable in this country and elsewhere. so let it be...i am only asking that we not pretend that foie gras production is something which it is not..i am sure there are millions who can live with the fact that animals experience suffering and distress before coming to their plate as food. it is not my burden to bear, but it shouldnt have to be the lie that i have to swallow either.
animal welfare folks, vegans, vegetarians, omnivores in search of humanely raised animal products...we are not like foie gras ducks. we cant be forced to swallow the propoganda. just because some dont want to ask the right questions doesnt mean that the rest of us wont.
i am not looking to change minds or 'convert' anyone. i dont trust it will happen...not here anyways. but privately...inside your mind, ask yourself these important questions before repeating the propoganda you repeat. there is no 'right' or 'wrong' choice when it comes to what we eat. what we eat is what we want. but what is it that we *really* want after we cut through the bullshit, propoganda and the veil of lies.
faustianbargain
may we never cross paths, jennie/tikka.
Claudia
Faust - enough already! Stop with the "Fine, Claudia" and then proceeding to reiterate everything you've repeatedly stated since you started on this issue! Enough - EVERYBODY!
faustianbargain
what? it is relevant, isnt it? it is about food and certainly about francophilia. it is on topic, isnt it?
CarolinaGirl
I have had enough! Please! This discussion has been beat to death.FB, you are like the houseguest who doesn't leave when the party is over. I think you really need to get your own blog under your own name and spread your gospel elsewhere. Blogs are free if you look, and that way, you and those who are like minded can spend all day discussing whatever it is you believe. Perhaps, that way the true owner of this blog, Mr Ruhlman can get back to his mission and thinking folks with something genuine to say can do so without your rediculous commandeering of this blog.You are obviously steadfast in your beliefs, I respect that. I just think you are becoming boorish and your arguements are personal atacks. The topic was not how to change people's thinking with threats and incoherent ramblings and slanderous attacks on TRUE profesionals.It was "unapologetic Francophelia" I ask you in the sake of decency to get your own forum. You will be happier and so will everyone else!
Wilmita
FB
I believe we've ALL had enough of the "Vegan-Jellicle", ad nauseum discussion.
Wilmita
Claudia
Faust, it is no longer relevant since it the topic has been flogged to death, and all your arguments stated, restated, reiterated and re-reiterated ad nauseum, ad infinitum to the point that while I used to at least respect some of your arguments, you are now basically holding the entirte blog hostage with your repeated, 20 column-inch diatribes. It is also no longer relevant since, quite clearly, there is nothing to be gained by indulging in this repeated foie slugfest - the pro-foie faction isn't going to change your (or anyone else's) mind, and you aren't going to change theirs.
That's what I trying to tell you. It's not about agreeing or diagreeing with your position - it's about the fact that this issue has gone o n for over 2 weeks, it is not a civil, intelligent, thought-provoking discussion (with differences of opinion), and there is now nothing but collateral damage (i.e., a whole bunch of other bystanding bloggers). It's like being trapped in Who's Afraid of Virginia Woolf?, with horrified guests at cocktail party being cornered by a clutch of pugnacious, vitroilic drunks.
And the French have a lot more going on that just foie, which would make a welcome change in food item, while still being "Francophilically" on-topic, board-wise.
faustianbargain
ok.
Claudia
Thank you. And thank you, Connor, for your kind words earlier (blush!)
ruhlman
steven,
in my experience, confit done sous vide is not appreciably different in taste and texture from traditional. what is different is that the temp is regulated, it requires considerably less duck fat, and doesn't take up the oven for 10 hours.