Top Chef - S8E7 Postmortem

And with that, we secure what should be a relatively drama-free second half of the season.

I doubt anybody's too upset about Marcel leaving. Villain edit, actual villain, whatever. Rear view mirror.

Another killer episode. I hear ratings are down, but people are missing out.

And of course Dale and Blais BOTH show strong, making for another tough call at the top.

Top Chef takes the week off, and so do we. From Top Chef, that is. Rankings on the 31st(ish). Hoping to take care of some of the restaurant backlog this week now that we're relatively settled in the new place.

Discuss!

Comments

[garik16]

Awesome episode. Bourdain was hilarious.

First all four fish dishes must have been great, given that the only complaint was that Marcel's was monochromatic.

Second, restaurant wars...when they were picking teams, the expression on everyone's face as they were picked and not picked by Marcel was hysterical.

Marcel and Richard really got displayed as the polar opposites of each other. Richard was helping his team and when he spoke up and said he was the technical advisor on his team, not a single one of them looked at him oddly and in fact they complimented him. Flip Richard with Marcel and the teams probably come out on opposite sides, though at least they'd have a pretty good front of house guy (Fabio is still the best at that in Top Chef history).

And down goes Marcel.

[Cousin Sam]

thank GOD.

[EdT.]

So, does Professor Blais get a bump next week, Dom?

~EdT.

[Dreamboat]

Two comments. First, how ironic that Bourdain sent Dale home in RW in his season and Dale extracts immunity from him this season? As soon as the quickfire cooking part was announced I knew Dale would win. Asians use every part of an animal. Americans, not so much.

Second, The Black Hammer sent home villain 1 and villain 2, back to back. Nice job Hammer :D

[garik16]

BTW: Bourdain's blog this week is beyond hilarious. His description of Marcel World is just, well, if you can't crack up from it, you don't have a sense of humor.

[Vega]

I am so glad that Marcel left with a minimal amount of drama. The food-to-drama ratio this season is looking pretty good.

[doktarr]

I'm feeling fairly vindicated for putting Marcel at #10 in my rankings. He's been good in the quickfires and bad in the eliminations all season. It was a matter of time.

Given the way the picks went down, if the win had gone the other way, it would have been one of the bigger upsets in TC history. Dale pretty much nailed every pick, while I would disagree with just about all of Marcel's picks.

I could see keeping Dale at #1, but Blais could definitely grab that spot. Angelo feels like #3 to me at this point, but there's still a big gap between Angelo and Carla/Antonia.

[steve]

Marcel's exit interview is delusional. But be sure to check out the video produced by the Elves on the Team Top Chef blog.

That said, it was good to see Richard's win based on the respect of the judges and the members of his team.

[Anon man]

"Perfect storm of f****** awfulness"

Best. Line. Ever.

Antonia muffed a ragu she can do easily, Mike the Greek can't cook lamb and Angelo the subtle overplays his hand. Everyone in the kitchen performed under their standards. Gotta blame the leader for that group fumble.

[matthew]

Ok. A little anticlimactic. I think a lot of us knew going in that Marcel would be eliminated. The editing, of both the previews and the show itself, didn't even try to hide it. Speaking of foreshadowing...check out the previews for next week. There's quite a lot of talk about risotto, and you can clearly see who's making it.

I'm with Vega on the comment about minimal drama. There's going to be some drama because there are plenty of egos left in the competition.

I hate to say, but other than for sh*ts and giggles, I pretty much discount the quickfire challenges at this point. Tonight's was better, in that it challenged a particular skill, but I don't put much weight on how people perform. I did appreciate that the top four had a cook-off. THAT is why I watch the show. I want to see what rabbits people can pull out of a hat. I'm less interested in who can fillet two fish in under 10 minutes.

As for the restaurants, I think things played out how I expected them too. Who did predict that Fabio would nail the FOH? I was a little concerned that he would be a little too charming, but he was really measured. Juxtapose that to Tiffany's FOH performance, which was ... ummm ... just bad. I would really be annoyed if a host hovered over my table and talked all night. Particularly if she had that piercing laugh.

I knew Etch was going down the drain precisely when Antonia said that Team Bodega was worried that their dishes weren't as refined. That was an easy foreshadow. I actually questioned the choice of dishes from Etch. None of them looked that great, though Mike's octopus and pork did nice.

The winning team's dishes looked good across the board. I was concerned about the practicality of the tuna can, and some of the diners confirmed my suspicion that it made it a little difficult to eat.

[homer comment] Carla got picked last. I think, again and again, people underestimate or just don't respect Carla's skills. Judging by comments on Twitter, this was not lost on others either. Oh...and I just about lost it when I saw she was doing dessert AGAIN. She's good at sweets, she's launching a cookie line, but come on! I just shook my head.[/homer comment]

I like the power rankings, because Dom puts a lot of thought into the positions and explains the choices. With that said, though, I think we're getting to the point where it's shades of grey between the contestants. I don't think it matters who's #1 because I feel like Top Chef history shows you that anyone can have a bad day, and we've witness presumptive favorites get tripped up in the race to make the final four. It is usually the result of self-induced pressure or a regrettable sense of "I've got this."

[lb]

OK I just have to say it. I dislike Richard a lot. A lot. I'm okay with him winning because he did work to elevate the whole team, and he's now in second behind Dale on my personal power rankings. But I just can't stand him. I don't really know why. So I hope he doesn't win this season. I'm still pulling for Dale or Angelo (didn't like that Tom called him out specifically for not being a leader here when if he did take that role and they lost, Tom would have likely asked everyone if he was a saboteur).

Also shocked about Marcel leaving. Thought they would keep him just for the drama he brings. Who will be our "faux-villain" now?

[garik16]

Matthew: The odd thing is that once Fabio was taken, Carla would've been a perfect choice for FoH duty. You need a front of house person (I guarantee that was the thought in taking Fabio, though I can't remember the exact order in which people were taken), and Carla's warm personality would seem like a good fit.

In R Wars, you want a team that is fitting for teamwork as well as a good chef (this is why Blais kicks ass in this challenge). Carla fits there as well. So it was indeed odd.

(Marcel was the worst on both of these things.)

[jbb]

> (didn't like that Tom called him out specifically for not being a leader here when if he did take that role and they lost, Tom would have likely asked everyone if he was a saboteur).

Hmm. I feel like Tom has been pretty darn consistent in shooting down those "saboteur" accusations every time they've come up, but maybe my memory is missing some pieces.

[vesuvius]

If you haven't already done so, go to the Bravo blogs, scroll to the bottom of the "Team Top Chef" blog, and watch the music video montage of Marcel. Just do it. I'm still in tears (tears of pure joy and laughter!)

[vesuvius]

To make it easier, here's the link:

http://www.bravotv.com/top-chef/season-8/blogs/team-top-chef/marcel-mar-so-so

[jbb]

Also, can I just say how much I loved every bit of the quickfire?

1) Bourdain hosting = gravitas
2) Did a fantastic job of highlighting an unsung hero found in real kitchens across the globe
3) Balanced practical, technical skill
4) with creativity once you'd passed the technical assessment.

Just brilliant from top to bottom, in my opinion.

[KinderJ]

What impressed me most about Fabio's performance was the organization, leadership and communication skills he brought to the FOH. Tom noted the same things, pointing out that Fabio was directing every server around the room and still managing to check on every table. He also spoke up for his servers, but in a non-confrontational way which diffused the problem. That's leadership and brains. Hard to give the win for FOH on Top Chef, but boy, I would have been really, really tempted.

Bourdain's blog was spot on. Marcel is a very talented cook but a lousy chef, 'chef' being defined as someone who leads other cooks. A shame, but if you wont listen and wont learn, you cannot lead.

There has been a lot of discussion about Richard being the chef most invested in thinking about and understanding the mechanics underlying TC challenges. I buy that. That being said, by picking Marcel to lead the other team, Dale ran one of the canniest games I have seen since the show started running. Elegant, effective, and lethal to the contestant who most irritated him. One might argue that he should have picked Angelo, if he was trying to eliminate a competitor through team collapse. My view is that people will follow Angelo. He has shown enough skill and amassed enough wins to inspire confidence in others. Better the foam bird in the hand, as it were...

[Danny]

I was so excited that Bourdain was coming up with a challenge but I never dreamed that it would include Justo. He is someone that Bourdain truly idolizes. I just read the chapter that Bourdain wrote about Justo so it was an incredible treat to see him in person and watch someone who is probably the best in the world at what he does. Imagine, what he does daily in 5 hours takes 3 people to do (I think that each of them put in 10 hours if I remember what I read correctly). No other food show can get the sort of guests that TC routinely gets. It is obvious that this show is very respected.

Dale won the minute he made Marcel the captain of the other team. Marcel is difficult to work with at best and then to put him charge - yikes!

[garik16]

Kinder, the problem with picking Angelo is that it would stick Dale (picking last) with Marcel. I'm not sure if Dale knew picking the opposing captain would result in that captain picking first (it probably was on the forms of the challenge, but we didn't know till it happened), but if he did, picking anyone but Marcel was probably suicide.

[KinderJ]

jbb- I agree completely. That was a well designed QF, and one I think was intended to send a message. In Medium Raw (which has the chapter on Le Bernadin) Bourdain points out that for all that efficiency, there is a hell of a lot of wasted high end fish. Of course, it goes bad really fast, so what to do? He proposed getting team of ex-cons looking for work to break down what was left and turn that meat into fish balls. Use up the left over meat, create a delicious and sellable product, and provide reasonably low skilled labor for people who desperately need the work. Send them to restaurants all over the city (NYC), make it a franchise. I really like seeing people taking that public spotlight and making a public spirited point in an utterly non-preachy way. Bourdain's QF did that.

[KinderJ]

Garik16- I am sure that also played into his calculation. My bet would be that picking Marcel to be the other captain just worked on many levels for Dale, including the 'I really don't want to be stuck with this guy' factor. I still would bet at least a small sum of money that he knew the (cliche alert) honor was a poisoned chalace.

[ally]

I really respect Fabio for what he did on tonight's show. He's a professional, no doubt. Chef-dom still in question but even his dish was impressive apparently.

Unlike Matthew I was fooled by the "Tiffany is going home" edit. (She was the first on camera and also had the "head-in hands" shots. The elves are becoming less consistent and I'm grateful for that. I'm not a Marcel hater but to be honest I'm glad to see him gone. I just think he's lightweight compared to the top contestants. (Foam, lightweight, ...)

Giving props to Dale, he may have anger management issues but his strong showing in his season is being perpetuated here. Angelo is reaching the mid-season slump he showed last season. So props to Dom for predicting the trend.

Props also to Richard, finally a legitimate win. But he got almost no airtime, as the losing team was hilighted ad nauseum. Nobody was fooled when they were called into Judges' Table first. What I didn't like about this episode is just that I didn't really understand what components went into any of the dishes. I felt like I know ten times more about the quickfire dishes than the elimination ones. I loved this episode but it seems to me that the food got a short shrift.

Language note: I just had to look up shrift because I didn't know if I had the word right. Funny read if you google it. PLUS: I meant to mention this earlier ... I don't remember who said this in a post but I'm too lazy to go back and look for it...last thread someone talked about Carla's "Cone of silence" and if you look that up in wikipedia it will bring back some hilarious "Get Smart" memories.

[Vega]

Oh yeah! Carla WAS picked last, wasn't she? What utter nonsense. She's won two elimination challenges. That was irritating. Carla needs more props for how fantastic she is.

[Skillet Doux]

"Nobody was fooled when they were called into Judges' Table first."

Except Richard, apparently.

On Carla being picked last, no, it isn't a compliment, but given that she's the only remaining contestant who isn't a restaurant chef, I'm not sure it's quite as egregious a snub as it first appears.

[bryanD]

A shockingly good episode. Each of the many, many contestants were given fair wingspread opportunities in the edit. And The Food was actually pretty close to comprehensible BEFORE JT! (The generally misleading diners' reaction cuts? Eh. The diners were essentially props anyway since the contest was not close. No charges of misdirection will hold up in a court of law since the principle of habeas victus was respected.)

And the Drama? I normally hate Drama. But this time any hyperbolics worked like a classic flashback movie in servicing the plot, so to speak; say, as in Casino (Scorcese,1990): We KNOW (or think we know) how things will end: Asocial Marcel? Team Leader?? With prior elfin spoilers factored in??? [cue gunshots; cacophonous sound effects; groans]...But this foreshadowing did not detract because Marcel was sending out gilt-edged invitations to be whacked. In person. To everybody. Repeatedly.

Speaking of "Casino" and "whacked", next week's mafia gimmick episode looks to be non-boring! If they break up into teams, the smart money is on The Outfit of Chicago over any or all 5 Families of New York.

My one gripe this episode? That TC did not have confidence enough in the skill of any of its All-Stars to grant them the duly-noted 3:1 fish-cleaning time opportunity to match LeBernadin's second-string butchering average in QF prelims. The time allowed was not clearly divisible (as if time were not editorially compressed anyway. BUT I get it: a commercial for LeBernadin and the amazing LeBernadin stalwart, Thomas. I get it, I get it. No biggie.)

Episode grade: A+

[matthew]

Dom, I think it's more the former. Carla's been a chef in a restaurant. I think it's just a lack of respect by some of the other contestants (ahem...Dale). That's not the first time he's questioned Carla. Without getting into specifics, Carla confirmed that the recognition was lacking. Carla speaks highly of Dale, so I suspect he may have come around. It's hard to tell with Carla, though, because she's nice to everyone. The funny thing about this whole thing is, I could see if you had questions about her skill at the very beginning, but after 7 or 8 challenges, you would think people would say, "Hmmm...she's got some skills." Oh well, under the radar with the other contestants is not necessarily a bad thing.

[ally]

I'd like to take a self-promoting moment to mention a comment I made after last episode -"Marcel was chugging bombay sapphire gin, so i give him a break. Thing is, when you're an asshat (thanks for bring that one back) then you tend to suffer in group challenges..."

Bye bye Marcel.

[matthew]

For whatever reason, the expression "asshat" makes me laugh without fail.

[Skillet Doux]

Just trying to play devil's advocate, Matthew. RW is such a crucible that even if somebody picking respected Carla, I could see them hesitating because she is... unless I'm mistaken... much further removed from the line than the rest.

Which, for the record, doesn't mean that I'd agree with that call :-)

[matthew]

I understand your [valid] point.

[bryanD]

@Matthew: Carla is Medicine Woman. No brave wants to be War Chief over Medicine Woman. Kicking Medicine Woman, even in heat of battle, brings thoughts to War Chief of Great Spirit kicking War Chief in the nuts.

[Nick]

I have to say I was totally pulling for Ricky and thrilled for his win. I wanted to slap the diner who didn't understand how the can added to the dining experience, as I felt he clearly didn't understand the concept of the restaurant or ever buy a can of tuna.

But mainly I broke from primarily lurking to call out to you Dom, for the discussion of power rankings and seeds between Mike I and Richard in the after the knife vignette. There is clearly feedback for how the community has responded to top chef from top chef, and turned it into an almost march madness-like event.

[Nikki L]

I'm not going to lie, based off the editing, I thought the people were going to pick Etch and that the judges were going to be faced with the impossible tasks of picking a winner from that group and a loser from the restaurant they loved.

I was also thinking that Carla would have been a good FoH pick for the other team when Fabio was taken. Marcel really had no planning of team dynamics and just tried to pick the strongest cooks.

[Skillet Doux]

Heh... amusingly on point, from one of the videos just posted, Matthew...

Mike: "Restaurant Wars was good, and it happened fast, though, real fast."

Carla: "That was my big fear, because I don't work in restaurants. When they were like, 'Restaurant Wars,' everybody was like, 'Yay!' and I'm like this... [anxious face]"

[matthew]

Rub it in Dom...rub it in. :-)

[Bart]

Great episode. The chapter on Justo was one of my favorites and the most memorable from "Medium Raw." This was an excellent challenge, to boot. Not only did they have to efficiently cut fish, they didn't get to use the beautiful part of it and had to utilize the "waste" instead.

Very clever.

On the one hand, I can see where Marcel is coming from when he said that nobody listened to him. But it works two ways - you gotta listen to them too. And blaming your team for your loss? That's in bad taste.

The Black Hammer strikes again!

Ok, after this, I might have to conceded that Angelo isn't #1 anymore. I might drop him to 3, keep Dale at 1, Richard at 2.

[paula]

I take back my defense of Tiffany. Ugh, train wreck.

It pissed me off that Carla was picked last.

Marcel was intolerable last night, but I did feel a wee bit sorry for him because Mike I. was making things worse than they had to be. I get his frustation, but he's just kind of an ass. I really felt sorry for Angelo, too, who was so desperate to make the best of the situation and rise above the petty personality differences so they could perform better. His anguish at JT when Tom was giving him a hard time was hard to watch.

I heart Antonia. She'd be fun to hang with. And Richard: He's really starting to get into his head too much, which was part of his downfall in his own season. His anxiety last night, and all that second guessing, has the potential to unravel him. Still, I was glad he finally got a solid win.

[TxGriff]

I wonder if they would have done the Le Bernadin challenge if Jen was still competing? I bet she wishes she stuck around for that.

Not much to add- great episode. No problem with the elimination.

I think I would make my rankings:

1. Dale
2. Richard
3. Angelo
4. Carla/Antonia (I think they are even!)
5. Mike I.
6. Tre
7. Fabio (although I gained a lot of respect for him last night- I think he's the first FOH person to actually stand up for the servers)
8. Tiffany (hard to believe she was fan favorite last season)

[Bart]

TxGriff - Yes, I absolutely loved that. Fabio was brilliant in FoH, standing up for the servers, keeping a well-run and well-organized ship.

If this was Top Front of House, he'd win hands down. Best we've ever seen on this show.

[garik16]

TxGriff: They would have still done the challenge, they're all planned in advance. That's probably why Ripert didn't make an appearance, as they couldn't allow the perception of bias.

[Wangus]

I always love it when top chef contestants pick teams because I believe it gives great insight into a number of things: who feels comfortable with whom, whose skills are held in high regard, who is good at team picking, who thinks in the long term, etc etc. Indulge me for a moment as I lay out my thoughts on this very narrow subject. This is probably going to be long, so read it at your own peril. We'll be discussing all things from team roles to Carla's position.

Ah, picking teams. Reminiscent of grade school kickball, no? Remember when you were picked first that one time (I was a scrappy, fast, dodgeball player with a solid catching grip)? But do you also remember those times you got picked last? Let's just say I'm a bit height deficient so basketball picks were a bit tough on me. Good times. Good times.

Pre-warning: I don't know and have never met most of these chefs. My labeling them comes from the best I can gleam from interviews and watching the show. I could very well be 100% incorrect in my assumptions.

As discussed before, Dale makes the best pick in choosing Marcel as the other captain. I think we all pretty much agree there so no need to go into that further.

Here's where we get down to the nitty gritty. I am Dale Talde or Marcel Vigneron. I am a badass Top Chef. And any badass Top Chef worth his salt believes that he or she is more than competent (nay, superior) at all the requisites needed to perform executive chef duties. This includes creating a concept, approving dishes, executing to the highest level, expediting, and comfortably dealing with any potential situations that may arise. I say this to express the position that neither Dale nor Marcel consider themselves 'deficient' in any way, and therefore won't be picking to fill in a 'weakness'.

FIRST PICK: So my first pick is going to be what I call the "Concept Man". Blais describes it poetically: "the technical advisor". This chef is going to be creative and has the ability to take a concept and run with it. He or she is a 'dish-maker' as much as an 'executer', able to come up with clever and delicious concepts as well as able to constructively help the rest of the team with ideas and refinements.

This role fits Angelo and Richard to the letter. Dale has the added benefit in that he works well with both. Recently in the dim sum challenge, he worked with Angelo towards his 2nd EC win. Richard, of course, was a great buddy of his during season 4. My personal pick would be Richard; he's whimsical and thinks at a million thoughts a minute. Angelo is by no means a bad pick though. So Angelo and Richard appropriately are picked first.

SECOND PICK: So I've got my Concept Man. What I need now is the "work horse". I need a chef that has the long-term and RECENT experience of slaving away doing routine and sometimes rote tasks both to a high level and at a high speed. I need a guy that when I go "I need you to cut down a thousand racks of lamb before you go to bed", he goes "Yes, Chef!" and attacks it with a grin and fire in his eyes. Basically, I need my very own Justo.

Both Mike and Tre embody the 'work horse'. I might actually have picked Mike but for the very same reason I imagine that Dale was happier with getting Tre: Dale seems to know Tre better and may have a better relationship with the man. When it comes down to it, you want to pick people with whom you work better as long as you aren't picking a less strong contender. So Marcel picks Mike, and Dale picks Tre. So far things are still correct in my world.

THIRD PICK: Things start to wobble a bit here. Personally, I want a Front of the House person by this pick. I think the potential factor of the FoH is often overlooked in the show. A good FoH not only serves but also keeps communication and pace between the dining room and the kitchen. His or her job, when done expertly, allows the chefs in the kitchen to focus exclusively on the food rather than having to worry about all the intangibles outside. It can actually be an unbelievably heroic job. Fabio last night showed the FoH at its best, and I frankly wouldn't have been surprised or disappointed if he were given the win.

But instead, Marcel picks Antonia...

...and I'm not all THAT mad. I get it, I do. Antonio is like the Sweeper, the Jack of All Trades, the Swingman, etc. She can do everything and has shown competence in all the team roles needed. When it comes down to it, this really just isn't a bad pick. I can see where Marcel is going with it. I probably still wouldn't have done it strictly because I think Fabio is too clearly the winner when it comes to the FoH role (as opposed to the pretty fairly evenly combatted roles of 'Concept Man' and 'Work Horse' above). So Marcel gets Antonia, and Dale gets Fabio. And it's the first pick in which there is some sort of unbalance.

FOURTH PICK: ...and we get to where I think a captain makes the clearly incorrect pick. What was Marcel thinking? Dale has already taken an obvious FoH chef. How can Marcel NOT take Carla? She has proven that she interacts well and is comfortable with human interaction. I'd trust her far and away more than Tiffany to be my connection to the outside-the-kitchen-world. But no, he picks Tiffany and literally hands Carla to Dale. And it's this pick that makes the teams unbalanced. One little pick and DUN-DUN-DUN!

Now, as promised, on Carla: I agree that it was difficult (and I imagine more so for Matthew) to see Carla go last. She's be doing great in the competition, deserves her increased power ranking, and has a great personality. My point, as I hope has been shown above, is that her late picking was (in my mind) due to the filling in of team roles rather than because the captains (or at least Dale) thought she was necessarily deficient in any way. She DID go later than my game plan, but my assumption was still late third round.

Now I know what some people (out of the two people who are still reading this) might be thinking: you haven't talked about how good ANY of their food is! You're right. I don't. I don't think it's that critical here. Given proper time and a good environment, I think ALL of these chefs can rock a great dish. They really wouldn't be All-Stars this far int he competition if they couldn't. Yes, Tiffany, Fabio, and others might have a higher record of making a bad dish, but all of them have proven they can make a bad dish on a bad day. In the end, I think the "this person's dishes are slightly better" gives way to the concept of "makes a stronger team", and a stronger team leads to a better working environment and cohesion which leads to executing at a higher level.

And that's it! This is how my brain works. Haunting isn't it? I promise to try and not do this to you again.

[matthew]

@Paula wrote: "And Richard: He's really starting to get into his head too much, which was part of his downfall in his own season. His anxiety last night, and all that second guessing, has the potential to unravel him."

I agree. It was painful to see him get so wound up in the stew room when the first team went to judge's table. You could hear him comment at JT that he's was worrying to death for an hour (while the other team faced the judges).

[Cousin Sam]

even though Carla got picked last (and don't get me wrong, I felt for her too), the important thing is that she ended up on the right team. :)

[momjamin]

I too, noticed that Carla was picked last, which I thought was pretty odd right after her second win in 3 eps. I also noticed that all the women were late to get picked. FWIW.

[momjamin]

@Wangus. I read your whole analysis, and thought you were spot-on ;-) Dale was building a team, and a team he could work with. Marcel was out of touch. He didn't value FOH because he doesn't (seem to) value (or understand) human interaction.

[Anon Man]

Upon further viewing, a few additional comments:

1. I've come to the conclusion that Blais is quite clever. Not just in food, but in his thinking generally. His comment in his season about Fruit Loops being seasonal and his comment about McD's fish fry line guy being prestigious and his "play" (my word) on a filet o'fish are great examples. I think his worry/over-think/affectations are a by-product of him being of above-average smarts.

2. In the TIVO busting outtake, Mike asks Fabio if he got a lot of tips "last night". Makes me wonder if they waited till morning to do the JT and made them dress up in the same clothes for continuity. Minor thing, but sleezy.

3. @matthew, I don't get the Carla last thing, either, although wasn't it Marcel who dissed her by not picking her over Tiffany and Dale just took her because that's who was there? While Carla would be excellent FOH, we all know Fabio is very good at it, and picking Fabio for FOH is like picking a former MVP to be on your team. As for the dessert thing, I noted she did dessert again, but it seems like she's done less desserts this season. In her season, she was the only one not afraid of desserts and she was the obvious dessert person (like Stefan, another caterer, in his season). This season, while we know she can do desserts, I had actually forgotten that she was the dessert queen, and when I saw her doing the pie, I did the facepalm, "Of course!" as my mind remembered her season. While I think Wagnus's analysis is good, someone could have picked Carla earlier based on past performance. But while I get picking Antonia over Fabio or Carla for another "work horse", Marcel completely ignoring FOH in his last pick was the kind of massive lapse in leadership that pretty much caused his demise.

[TxGriff]

wangus- I agree with you. I was initially shocked about Carla being picked last, and I still don't think it was the right call, but I understand the thought process, at least for the first couple rounds. I can see the debate between picking Carla or Antonia, maybe in this challenge giving the slight edge to Antonia since she has more immediate restaurant experience, but picking Tiffany over Carla? Not only has Carla been performing better food-wise (much better, in fact), but she's a far more obvious pick for FOH. It seems clear that if anyone understimated/understimates Carla, it's Marcel.

[nomnomnom]

This is Blais' to lose. He basically set up the entire show for his side. The editing of the previews + the format had me thinking they would have had to pull someone off his team. It was a stupid double fake that if they had shot the episode better it would have seemed a little more dramatic. So it goes.

Nobody else really moves very much IMO. I think Tre maybe comes out of the cellar and exchanges for Tiffany. Tre/Carla/Tiffany are interchangeable in the bottom tier for me. There is a very clear line between each set of three chefs remaining in my mind.

Marcel was fairly easy to call as the restaurant week off chef (even before previews), much like Kenny last year. A struggling chef wants to make a big splash and get in the mix and buy some breathing room. Then he gets distracted with other dishes, and his fizz out and boom, it's over.

Am I crazy or is this the third time they have had Soprano's guest stars on?

[nomnomnom]

@anon re 2. I doubt it. It seems like they just did the whole episode in the patio of whatever condo tower they were staying at. This whole season is flying by in real time by my estimation. I think they typically shoot the regular season in 24-27 days (Season 3 was much longer (~35)) This one is on track if I'm keeping up with it to go only about 18 days.

[ally]

"In her season, she was the only one not afraid of desserts and she was the obvious dessert person (like Stefan, another caterer, in his season)."

Stefan and Carla were in the same season!

[ally]

@nomnomnom: if by Sopranos star you mean Lorraine Bracco next week, this is her second appearance. Season 1 she provided the wines to pair with dishes for the finale.

[matthew]

Great write up Wangus. I can't say that I disagree with your take on the selections. (You conjured up memories of my fantasy football draft last fall.) First up, power, mid-draft, utility, later rounds--speciality, and clean-up pick is usually a sleeper. I think the only difference here was the last pick. I do wonder if Marcel was thinking FOH. Maybe he did, and thought Tiffany would be better. I don't know. With Carla left there, I am pretty sure that Dale was thinking, "Sweet...dessert!" (no pun intended)

I think Fabio revealed that he's run his own restaurant, versus Tiffany who has been an executive chef. I kept thinking about Big Night watching Fabio work the FOH and come back into the kitchen area. He really did a great job.

[Natalie]

Actually, Wangus, it made perfect sense to me, and sent me over to TV Tropes (where I promptly lost a hour of my life.)

http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/FiveManBand

Dale's team won not only because they had great food and a fun concept, but because he put together a kick-ass band.

The Hero: Dale
The Lancer: Richard
The Big Guy: Tre
The Smart Guy: Fabio
The Chick: Carla (in the awesome way)

Clear, concise, streamlined. Any problems the hero/team faces are dealt with by the appropriate person.

The Hero: Marcel
The Lancer: Angelo (or Antonia)
The Big Guy: Mike I
The Smart Guy: Antonia (or Angelo)
The Chick: Tiffany

The trouble with Marcel's team is that he's a Smart Guy and not a Hero (chef). This and his refusal to let anyone effectively interact with the others leaves the rest of the band mushed together doing a little bit of everything and nothing well. Mike attempts to Big Guy through the heat of service? Snapped at. Angelo tries to back Marcel up while smoothing Mike I's feathers? Squashed. On and on and on.

[BK]

OK, you gotta read Fabio's blog about Restaurant Wars:
http://fabioviviani.com/blog/fabio-on-top-chef-restaurant-wars/

"Richard Blais is eating a Banana with Nutella, I am making a Sandwich with it….Professor what the hell is wrong with you ?? Can’t dip a Banana in Nutella, it’s wrong…. would you dip a Tootsie Roll in Mustard ??"

"Justo Thomas, is his fish monger, this guy is good, actually is “the best there is”, he clean every day 700 to 1000lbs of fish in less than 6 hours, i do that in 6 month, Anthony Bourdain probably will take 6 years !!"

"Richard Blais look like hes about to throw up !! Richie relax is JUST Bourdain and Eric Ripert fish monger….no one is sending anyone home right now !!!"

... and so on ...

[Bill G]

I've been to Fabio's restaurant a couple of times and he spends a lot of time shmoozing the crowd. He looked pretty happy when they announced restaurant wars and he knew he wasn't going to have to cook much.
I thought it was interesting the way the crowd reacted to the lamb. It seems chefs and serious foodies like meat very rare so they tend to cook to the judges but a lot of the general dining public is put off by meat that rare. I tend to think I like meat cooked rarer that most people but some of the items they send out on Top Chef look raw and barely seared.
Despite a bit of a stumble by Antonia I still think she is a major player. Angelo looked like he was running out of steam last night but it may have been the Marcel effect. Although I do seem to remember him running out of ideas late in his season.

[wolfefan]

I LOVED Fabio's blog! Bad news for Stefan, though. :) And I'm sorry to hear about Fabio's grandmother...

[matthew]

Thanks Natalie. Now I have also been sucked into a black hole of time, reading about each role in the band. :-D Fascinating, really.

[redpoint]

I thought that in a very quiet way, Angelo looked very good last night. Unlike the rest of his team, Angelo realized that the honorable thing to do was let Marcel lead. Under the circumstances, he couldn't be the "technical advisor." Even though Blaise did well in this episode, I wouldn't put him above Angelo just yet. And if I were a judge I'd be hard pressed not to give the win this episode to Fabio.

[redpoint]

Oh, Fabio, I love you. Thanks BK for the link!
I scare my cats by laughing out loud:
"At the end the team ETCH is sending out a plate that smoke, I bet Bourdain and some other diners would’ve prefer a bag of weed, at this point I think ill pick that one too instead of Marcel dessert !! I’m kidding, please don’t use drugs, an awful dessert is still better than any good drugs…"

[Cousin Sam]

see, no gin this time. the dude is an asshat, period.

http://www.bravotv.com/top-chef/season-8/videos/havent-won-anything

[Naomi]

Great episode!

Random comments:

Wangus, I read your whole post :-) and agree completely. Marcel should have looked at Carla and thought "score! Great FOH AND she'll be able to to bang out a killer dessert too!" It's a shame he can't get out of his own way.

Although I've felt that Tre's ouster during Restaurant Wars has become almost mythical in its injustice, I was thrilled to see both Dale and Tre do so well last night - not only because they were on the winning team but because their dishes were well received.

Excellent points have already been made - both here and in the Bravo blogs - about why Marcel failed as a leader and why Etch failed be extension. I'm glad though that his food was poor as well. I'm glad he went home for a combination of cooking and leadership. On the same note, I would have been happy with Fabio winning because he excelled at FOH AND he gave them a dish they raved about. I hate to see either a win or a loss that isn't at least partially about the food, you know? Was very happy with Richard's win though.

This may have been my favorite restaurant wars ever. One restaurant did extremely well which I always like to see (I find success more entertaining than failure). And, the person most responsible for the losing restaurant was the one sent home - no injustice and nobody undeservedly taking the fall. I felt satisfied when all was said and done.

[Polybus]

Even though work suffers, I love going to bed just after the show and then spending my first hour in the office reading everyone's overnight comments.

KinderJ wrote: "There has been a lot of discussion about Richard being the chef most invested in thinking about and understanding the mechanics underlying TC challenges. I buy that. That being said, by picking Marcel to lead the other team, Dale ran one of the canniest games I have seen since the show started running. Elegant, effective, and lethal to the contestant who most irritated him." Beautifully put and I couldn't agree more.

I held my breath waiting for Dale to pick his adversary, pretty much knowing he would pick Marcel. It was a great pick. Very smart. I held my breath again waiting for Marcel to pick his first team member. I was with Richard, praying that Marcel would pick anyone but him. You could almost see the relief on both Dale and Richard's faces that they had the opportunity to work together again. Dale and Richard make a powerful team. Nothing against Angelo, but my first thought was: Angelo and Marcel will hype each other and their team completely out of the competition.

Wangus, I think more than two people read your breakdown of the picks and I think it was very well-thought out and spot on. I can't believe that Marcel did not pick Carla earlier to counter Dale taking Fabio. I don't know that it would have given Etch the win, but it would have made the competition closer.

As to the comment that the first person taken should be the creative presence to serve an advisory role to Executive Chef, I had not considered that. But the difference between Angelo and Richard in that regard was enormous. Marcel and Angelo could not come up with anything more creative than Another Mediterranean Restaurant, whereas Richard and Dale came up with something amazingly playful and creative by developing the bodega concept toward finer dining. I was a little shocked that Tom couldn't see that in his pre-service walk-through, although he certainly got it during the actual service.

Etch was pretty much dysfunctional top to bottom (Medi sounds boring, but Etch is too close to Retch). Someone commented earlier (sorry that I don't have the cite) that Marcel is a good cook not a good chef and I think that Dale knew that when he picked Marcel to lead the other team. I think it was more than simply picking the person who annoyed him most - I think Dale knew exactly what kind of havoc he was about to wreak.

I personally think this was the most enjoyable Restaurant Wars ever.

[Steve]

About time Marcel left! I respectfully disagree with Dom who had Marcel in the middle. He's been mediocre in general and was letting his ego show badly lately. He hadn't made one good dish this season as far as I can remember.

Fabio definitely deserves to be higher. Next week is Italian food. And Fabio has shown he can deliver better than Tre.

[nomnomnom]

So the FBI just pulled in 125 mobsters in NY. Ironic considering the next episode?

[TxGriff]

Steve- do you mean Fabio can do Italian food better, or he has done better overall? I actually disagree on both accounts. Performance wise, I think they've been pretty even. Very inconsistent, with the highs being good dishes that didn't sound technically impressive. I think Fabio out performed Tre in Restaurant Wars, but it was definitely his best performance so far, and it sounds like Tre made a great dish. And, wasn't it Tre who made the best dish a few episodes back at the Italian restaurant (nowithstanding Tom's opinion)? I actually remember Richard saying he felt the most uncomfortable with Italian food because it's more simple this his typical style of cooking . I'm not sure if he meant the food at the specific restaurant or Italian food overall, but something to think about.

[TxGriff]

Btw, not saying that Tre cooks Italian food better than Fabio. Just pointing out that he seems to know what he's doing.

[jordanhc]

Couple thoughts.

1. Re: Carla Respect. My theory on why Carla doesnt get the respect has nothing to do with her success, rather her lows. I dont think people ignore the success she has had, I just think people cant entirely shake her poor season 5 start. Just went back through the power rankings and 3 eps in a row 7,8,9 she was ranked last before she started making her move. Thats pretty far into a season to be ranked last and I think people still remember her original RW disasters. I dont think any other all star was ever power ranked that low with so many others remaining in their own season.

2. I thought Fabio definately should have won. If you can be sent home for FoH then you need to be able to win for it too, and it really didnt seem like he could have done more + he apparently nailed his dish as well.

3. Thought Tiffany should have gone home. There is no way I could enjoy a meal if all I heard was her laugh out there + she didnt direct the staff at all and her dish was awful (and that was the better version then if she had served the raw eggs she originally made). Obviously Marcel doesnt inspire anyone, but I thought his team was a little unfair on him. Literally everyone on that team went in predisposed to not liking Marcel, never game him a chance to lead, no one listed to his ideas, Mike I yelled at him when Marcel tried to communicate more on the line etc. The only one who "pretended" to listen to him was Angelo and I think that was so he couldnt be accused of causing trouble and he knew he would be safe.

[El Paso Mark]

Most Excellent! A very enjoyable episode and great (Misleading) editing (Opinion) on the part of Bravo. Bourdain nailed it (Marcel) in his blog. I just can’t decide whether Marcel truly doesn’t know he’s an irritating, obnoxious, egotistical, childish butthead, or if he just doesn’t care. A bit of both? I just don’t know. Certainly Marcel has talent, but his talent doesn’t support his ego. How does he walk through a doorway with a head (Ego) that big? Turn sideways?

Brilliant stroke on Dale’s part by selecting Marcel as the opposing team captain as he had to have known the odds were that Marcel would self-destruct and scuttle his own ship. Jeez Marcel, what were you thinking!? First choice and you could have had the “Goose that lay’s a Golden Egg (Richard)” but instead chose Angelo!? Nothing against Angelo, but c’mon man, no brainer! And then he went on to (Apparently) pick his team based on the “Me” (Marcel) factor- Chef personalities and who he’s had the least amount of conflict with, with an eye on domination and an individual (Marcel) win. Odd though that he chose Mike (I’ll have to watch the selection order again).

Dale on the other hand seemed to have “Team win” in the forefront of his thinking and used strategy, talent, and luck to achieve that goal by selecting a few key players (Richard and Fabio) and then round out his team with good, solid chef’s (Carla and Tre).

Marcel of course used the “Me-me-me” concept.

I thought the editing kept the uncertainty and tension level up. On the surface it seemed like a slam-dunk for team Bodega. But then with the “Dinner’s will decide the winner” rub and the crafty editing which made it look (To me at least) that Bodega was tanking, well, had me on the edge of my seat and worried that team Bodega was going to bomb. Especially when team Etch was called in first! I thought “Oh, crap” who’s gonna get sent packing? Doesn't seem like it'll be Carla, Tre, or Fabio, so is Dale going to get sent home for Restaurant Wars again!? Richard? To my (And Richard’s) relief it was Etch that bombed. Seemed to me that it came down to either Marcel or Tiffany, and I was keeping my fingers crossed that Tiffany wouldn’t get axed (Would have sucked huge if Tiffany had gone home).

Well, in a way though I’m sorry to see you go Marcel. Truly you were the guy I “Loved to hate.” Well, not “Hate,” that’s too strong, so perhaps “The guy I loved to dislike” is better. Marcel you were comically dislikable but did add drama, tension, and a LOT of color to the show.

Cheers,

Mark

[mncharm]

I tend to agree with those who don't believe Carla being picked last is necessarily a comment on her abilities -- rather, I think Dale had a plan for who he would pick (I GUARANTEE that he and Richard had talked about how they would construct a RW team if they had the chance prior to the actual show), and for various reasons not related to her ability to cook solid food (most of which have been mentioned), she slotted into a late draft spot.

Marcel may have passed her over because he doesn't think she can cook...but who cares? His judgment is obviously pretty questionable.

I may be giving Dale more credit than he deserves, but I can see reasons for not picking Carla earlier that don't comment on her abilities. I certainly hope that at this point, he recognizes her abilities.

Long story short: I thought the way Dale picked the team was the best strategic move in the history of Top Chef -- from picking Marcel to lead the other team to every pick he made, there was perfect logic to it. Very well played.

Glad to see a challenge that allowed Richard to shine, and lend credence to my theory that thus far in the season, the challenges just haven't met his strengths. When one finally did, he stepped up and crushed 88 mph cookie. Well done.

Could still see Dale in the #1 PR spot, depending on how much you think Richard's overanalysis hurts him in the competition. For my money, though, Rochard's the most complete chef in the lot.

[jh]

Count me in amongst the group that generally agrees with Wangus's analysis. However, I was a little surprised that Dale didn't pick Antonia when he had the chance based on his familiarity with her and her cooking skills. Maybe Tre's prep skills are better, but I see Antonia as the better chef and team player. The curse of the Hammer, perhaps?

[JJ]

Wangus - enjoyed your post and your logic. While there is no guarantee though that Carla would have been a good FOH (because it takes more than charm to be FOH, you have to play stage manager, like Fabio did) I think Marcel blew it for another/additional reason: Carla can make kick-ass deserts. In my view, he was effectively DOA for two reasons: (1) choosing Mike instead of Tre and (2) Tiffany instead of Carla.

[matthew]

Not to leap ahead too far, but the next challenge has been mentioned a couple of times. If memory serves, when a challenge seems to be perfectly suited for a particular contestant(s) is exactly when the train to come off the rails. I will be interested to see how Fabio and Mike handle a challenge preparing Italian food. The preview are already teasing us a bit with this.

[Skillet Doux]

Matthew... I haven't watched the previews yet, but my first thought was that Fabio could totally bomb an Italian challenge. He could also knock it out of the park, but I've always thought his style of Italian looks incredibly uneven.

[redpoint]

If Dale had picked Antonia, Mike and/or Angelo instead of those that he did, with the exception of Fabio and maybe Blaise, the results would have been the same. Any team lead by Marcel would have imploded. Fabio was the key choice. Anyone else was interchangeable. Marcel created his own demise.

[jack]

re Sopranos stars

this is Bracco's second stint, but in season 2 (i think) the woman who played Artie's wife held a dinner party - Elia won the episode with whole roast chicken. And one of the chefs was dripping chocolate into the actress's mouth. The blonde chef got sent home for making 3 bad soups. Season 2, right?

So this would mark the 3rd time a Sopranos/Italian night challenge appeared, though they've used Bracco twice now.

[Sweet Sue]

I thought that Fabio should have won for his maitre'd performance.
Watching Dale alternately screaming at the waitstaff to pick up and get the f!@k away from him was driving me up the wall. Fabio saved the day, service wise, and produced a divine desert.
Also, isn't it wonderful that he writes exactly like he talks?
He can take my turtle for a stroll anytime.

[Vega]

Natalie, I love you for linking to TVTropes. That is all.

[JerseygirlAngie]

The greatest Restaurant Wars ( and, the greatest FOH ! ) in Top Chef history !

Except for some minor quibbles, everyone seems to be in agreement this week, but I'll interject a few points to discuss -

Did anyone else get the impression that Marcel's entire team, possibly excepting Angelo, basically blow off Marcel right from the start, and go on to basically do their own thing? Yes, I'm sure none of them were thrilled to be working with Mr. Personality, but hasn't everyone had experience with bosses they didn't like/respect ?

If, by some God-awful twist of fate, the diners had actually prefered Etch ( don't laugh, just look at the crowds eating at Cheesecake Factory and such ), could the judges have reversed the decision on grounds of absurdity ? If not, then I suppose as captain of the ship, Dale would go down - maybe not a good idea to let amateurs have so much power in the future.

[garik16]

Vegas: TVTropes will destroy your life. (http://tvtropes.org/pmwiki/pmwiki.php/Main/TVTropesWillRuinYourLife)

[Shannon]

Fantastic to see Marcel get booted, although its a shame he will take nothing from it. It's been a source of irritation to me for a long time that people imposed their personal struggles of being bullied on to Marcel, who, if he had gone to high school with you, would clearly have been the unpopular kid who found solace in cruelly picking on the even more unpopular kids. The guy is just a creep.

That said, the comments of the other chefs were a little unfair to him. They said somebody needed to lead, and he did try to do that, in his awful way. What really should have happened for this team to win was somebody saying right off that being picked as captain by Dale was no affirmation and that Marcel could be the expediter and nominal executive but they needed to act as an equal group from concept through execution. They also clearly should have made Angelo front of house, as he is, like Fabio, a mostly genial perfectionist dictator - and he could have used the rest of his time to help conceptually, which is clearly a strength. Throwing Tiffany out there to flop was cruel, and I'm glad she didn't pack her knives because of it.

Ah, this one was done as soon as they picked teams. At least the losing team was able to get Marcel out, which was the best outcome for all parties, especially me.

[doktarr]

I didn't mention this in the earlier challenge, but I am a big fan of the new twist to RW. Making the diners votes count really makes every dish you put out matter, in stead of being more "make 2 really good versions of everything, and slog through the rest of service." I also liked that they've stripped out the whole picking glasses/tablecloths thing, and made restaurant wars more of a cooking challenge. All in all, I thought this was a really great episode.

Inspired by Magnus, I'll break down the selection process.

Dale opposing captain pick - obvious pick. Puts Marcel on the other team AND puts Marcel in charge. Any other pick would have been a huge blunder.

Marcel #1 - I think Richard is a better pick here. He has a much stronger track record working with other chefs than Angelo. Not a terrible pick, but not the best one he could have made.

Dale #1 - Good pick. Dale works better with Richard than he does with anyone else. Pretty obvious pick.

Marcel #2 - Decent pick, but I think it was a mistake. The potential for conflict with Mike I was too large.

Dale #2 - Decent pick. It worked out for him because Fabio was still around on the flip side, but it was a risk. Tre is a good chef, but Antonia could do the job here as well and was part of Richard's winning restaurant in his season. I would have taken Fabio here and picked up whoever was left between Tre and Antonia on the return, just to play it safe.

Marcel #3 - Good pick, probably. Antonia is solid and Marcel basially has to save FotH for his fourth pick at this point.

Dale #3 - good pick, obviously. Fabio nailed it.

Marcel #4 - I'm going to go ahead and call this the worst pick of the draft. At this point Marcel should realize that he has no FotH person, so he's picking someone for that role. Tiffany is a good (if somewhat inconsistent) cook but she's not an obvious FotH person. Carla not only seems like a natural FotH choice, but she is also known for her fruit tarts. Let her bang out a tart and then go out front. It's obvious.

[Elise]

I think Wagnus had a very good point, and I'd like to take it a little further, you'll note on the tennis team challenge, who was the one contestant they figured they'd just give the win? Richard.

From what you see of what the other chefs seem to say and how they act, I get the sense they see him as the guy to beat.

On a completely unrelated note, it's a crying shame that every time Fabio and Carla have been up for fan favorite they've had to go up against each other.

[EdT.]

"...Etch is too close to Retch..."

I'm glad somebody else caught this too!

~EdT.

[EdT.]

"...but I am a big fan of the new twist to RW. Making the diners votes count really makes every dish you put out matter..."

As am I. This addresses the Jennifer Carroll "I cook for the judges" fallacy. Also, it tossed the chefts a curve ball they had to deal with.

~EdT.

[Natalie]

Heh, matthew and Vega, you're welcome and I'm sorry. TV Tropes will ruin your life, but at least you'll go out entertained.

Upon 2nd viewing, I have to say that I died laughing watching Dale whip around that table and the servers step back and forth like a terrified wave. I know it wasn't Formerly Angry Dale's finest moment, but it sure was visually amusing.

[Anon Man]

If you'll excuse a random rant by an Italian: I'm so tired of the meme that "Italian food is simple". Italian food isn't more or less complicated than any other cuisine. Everyone seems to think its noodles and some sauce and cheese and there it is. Yes, some ingredients are used a lot. But, saying its simple because pasta is often a course is like saying Japanese food is simple because there's a lot of rice. (In other words, if a rigatoni in Bolognese is close to spaghetti with Romano and pepper, then sushi is just rice with fish and tonkatsu is rice with pork.) Italian food is an incredibly varied cuisine from city to city and dish to dish. Its so incredibly ignorant and insulting to say that it is "simple" as if a) simple is bad and b) its any more so than any other cuisine.

End rant.

[TxGriff]

Anon Man- I agree with you about the simple label on Italian food, at least when simple is meant in a condescending way, or to classify such a diverse cuisine by one style. However, I was quoting Richard, who did say that he felt out of his element because he had to cook food that was more simple (or a very similar word) than the style he's accustomed to. Again, I'm not sure if he was referring to the overall style of the restaurant, probably the restaurant. And, most importantly, food that plays simple often is a result of thoughtful choices, an understanding of flavors and textures, and the wisdom of knowing when certain ingedients need to be left alone and shine unadalterated. Simple Italian dishes, just like simple dishes from any other type of cuisine, can have just as much merit as more complicated or technically advanced dishes. Just look at Kevin vs. Mike V in S6 (not an Italian chef, but a good example of "simple" vs. "creative/coplicated"). Which is all to say, simple doesn't always= bad or unworthy.

Your rant may have been about a general assumption of Italian food, yet I can only assume it was prompted by my earlier comment. Thus, I feel the right to defend myself as my comments were anything but "incredibly ignorant and insulting." Being a lover of Mexican and Indian food (and Italian), I understand the frustration with food labeling (Mexican= taco shells and pico de gallo, Indian= curry), so I'm trying not to take your comments personally.

[Danny]

Check out Marcel's commentary on ew.com. It's all Bravo's fault, it's all the fault of his team members - the other chefs would've loved to have worked with him - he doesn't need TC any more and will never do anything on Bravo again especially since his show on SyFy is going to be such a hit. Sigh. It's like he goes through life unwilling to learn anything.

[Skillet Doux]

Anon Man... I'll fight you on that one.

Simple is a *very* appropriate label for Italian food, and when you say that it "isn't more or less complicated than any other cuisine," I think that's simply false. How could you suggest that it's as technique-intensive as French, or as complex in terms of flavor as Indian? It just isn't. But I think you're seeing an insult here where none is intended. Rather, I think that's usually used to explain what makes Italian so beautiful. Simple isn't any less valuable or difficult to master. It's *hard* to make something stunning when you're exposed like that. You may do less, and your ingredients may be manipulated to a lesser degree, but precision in what you're doing and how you get there becomes even more vital. So when you say:

"Its so incredibly ignorant and insulting to say that it is "simple" as if a) simple is bad and b) its any more so than any other cuisine."

...I'd say you'd be right on A, but it's a straw man. Who's using the word "simple" to dismiss Italian rather than respect it? And on B, I think you're just wrong. That doesn't mean it isn't any less important to be careful or precise, or that the cuisine is any less difficult to master, or that it's any harder to screw up. Perhaps even the opposite. But to draw equivalence in terms of complexity with a lot of other cuisines is simply false as a matter of fact.

[Anon Man]

You and I will have to agree to disagree. I would say Italian food can appear simple, just as French food can be said to just be about butter, and both are wrong. First, I would say that the dishes that people love in French food or just as simple as the ones people love in Italian food. Cassoulet? Duck Confit? Crepes? These are French classics that are simple. And there are Italian dishes that are complicated, including one my favorites: dolceforte.

On the flavors, I get what you're saying, but completely disagree that you can say the flavors are "simple". They are subtle. I love Indian and enjoy a good curry, but it doesn't strike me as more complex than the elements in a good ragu: from the acid to the sweetness to the aromatics can be teased out within the mouth.

As for techniques, I think Italian takes amazing techniques: proper butchery, curing of meats, getting the proper thickness and bite to a pasta, being careful in how you cooked stuffed pastas, etc. Are they the same as the knife skills for sushi or the lightness of soufflé? No, but they don't strike me as any easier. And, that I think is the essence of my grievance with the criticism. You can point to say, Bistecca Fiorentina: easy! And I say, Steak au poivre is just pepper steak. On the flavors, I get what you're saying, but completely disagree that you can say the flavors are "simple". They are subtle. I love Indian and enjoy a good curry, but it doesn't strike me as more complex than the elements in a good ragu: from the acid to the sweetness to the aromatics can be teased out within the mouth.

As for techniques, I think Italian takes amazing techniques: proper butchery, curing of meats, getting the proper thickness and bite to a pasta, being careful in how you cooked stuffed pastas, etc. Are they the same as the knife skills for sushi or the lightness of souffle? No, but they don't strike me as any easier. And, that I think is the essnece of my greivance with the criticism. You can point to say, Bisteca Florentina: easy! And I say, Steak au poirve is just pepper steak.

[ally]

Earlier, Dom said that if Richard was going to go to #1 he would have to take it. I think he's done that now. This episode reminded me of everything that Richard seemed to be in his season, and honestly I haven't seen much of that since the mustard ice cream in the first episode. His playfulness and intelligence really was on full display here. These are qualities that Dale and Angelo just don't have. They have delicioius, but they don't have dazzling. I hope he keeps it up.

[Nikki L]

Richard definitely stepped up this episode but Dale is still clearly #1. He hasn't faltered yet and Richard has. Plus, this episode did not make Dale look any weaker. Either Richard is going to need to win a few more or Dale is going to have to take a big misstep in order for me to swap them.

[Polybus]

Maybe this is an over-simplification, but it sounds nearly like the conflict between Paradise and Pascal's in Big Night. The simple Americanized food of Pascal's makes it the most popular Italian restaurant in town while Primo's more complicated cuisine goes unnoticed until the Big Night.

Frankly, I was amazed at the food scenes in the film, especially when Primo makes timpano. It reminded me of some of the cuisine I encountered in Bavaria. Up until that point, I had thought German food to be "simple" but was astounded at the complexity. I don't want to enter into the argument, but it definitely made me think of the movie. (I still find it fascinating after the orgy of food that the final meal of the film is scrambled eggs with salt and pepper.)

[Skillet Doux]

Polybus... I think Big Night was less a matter of simple vs. complex, partly a matter of Italian vs. Italian-American, but mostly a matter or good vs. bad :-)

I'll write more when I'm not on a smartphone. This is a great topic and I don't want to lose it.

[Skillet Doux]

Oh, and Anon Man, you're probably right that we'll end up having to agree to disagree, but it's still definitely a discussion worth having. Back a little later.

[Anon Man]

I wait for your retort. Ignore the part of the post where it repeats. I had to pull it out of the comment window and cut and paste it back in and I didn't quite do that right...

[nomnomnom]

What's the word on the premiere date of Top Chef:Canada these days?

[HF]

Dom, for the Postmortem banner you have the Power Rankings image posted where usually you show the loser's picture.

Richard came back this week, but he still hasn't taken it due to his disaster last episode. I was surprised there wasn't any discussion about this over the last week... Richard damn near went home. With Fabio doing prep, it was a two man show of Marcel and Blais, and it's Richard who has more age and experience. He could have easily taken the reigns and had Marcel be subservient, but he didn't. He could have argued that they include a second dish. He could have grabbed the concept of the challenge better and not sent out "composed restaurant dishes" that went against the spirit of the location. And he could have realized that they were sending out an overly worked muddled mess.

I don't get the Marcel hatred so much. Dale's soundbites have been much more grating and asshatish to me. I guess the Elves did a good job there of setting up viewers on one side of the fence or the other.

Did you see it? Fabio's "Vote For Pedro" style "Team Fabio" shirt? :^D

[Sprugman]

One thing I haven't seen mentioned WRT Carla's being picked last: if we are to believe the editing, she pretty clearly did the worst on the QF. I can easily imagine that coloring her reputation a short while later when they're picking teams, whether deserved or not. Of course, I felt for her, Dale was brilliant to pick Marcel, Richard and Fabio were awesome, blah blah blah.

[bryanD]

@TxGriff,AnonMan,Skilletdoux:

Beware the vortex! Italian food debates need to be tackled in AT LEAST two parts to get ANYWHERE: 1)the "Italian" (Northern), and 2)the "Greek" (Southern).

I also move that "simple" be replaced by "easy" or "rustic" or "elegant" for clarity.
========================================================

Up until that point, I had thought German food to be "simple" but was astounded at the complexity.--Polybus

We might have crossed paths! I was headed the other way and was pleasantly surprised that Italy has some very good beer! (Talk about an international cover-up!)

[Dave]

@doktarr, I agree 100% with your post. I think Dale could have been outfoxed with his 2nd and 3rd round picks by waiting so long to take Fabio.

My opinion on the picks:

Marcel #1. You have to take Blais here. If he had watched any of Season 4 he'd have known that Dale and Blais worked amazingly well together. Even if you think Angelo is a slightly better chef, you take Blais just to keep him away from Dale.

Dale #1. Obviously Blais fell to him, although Angelo would have served the exact same role.

Marcel #2. He picks Mike. Worst pick of the night (just barely worse than Tiffany over Carla). This is a guy who in my mind is no different than Antonia or Tre (aka, your job is to bang out lots of food), plus he doesn't like you. Why pick Mike, of all people? Is it because he has a bromance with Angelo? I don't get it.

Dale #2. Now that Marcel has Mike, you know you're guaranteed one of Tre or Antonia. Knowing that, like doktarr I would have taken Fabio to lock down FOH, and banked on getting one of Tre/Antonia.

Marcel #3. Now that I think about it, Marcel probably got every single one of his picks wrong. It's like he's serving in tennis, he has the advantage in every single one of his picks, but he's just getting broken left and right. He can take the #1 FOH person here but instead takes Antonia. Who should have probably been his #2 pick. Terribly thought out.

Dale #3. Easy decision on Fabio. 0 serving 40.

Marcel #4. Tiffany over Carla. I think enough has been said about that. Game. Set. Match.

[Dave]

Oh, and @matthew, I get that you're disappointed that Carla was picked last, but look at it the other way: Marcel didn't pick her, and ultimately lost.

I mean, what if Carla was on Team Marcel? She probably would have been on the losing team and eligible to go home. Maybe in this alternate history Marcel screws up slightly less in his EC duties and Carla's dish(es) and/or FOH fall flat?

[jh]

This thought just occurred to me. Antonia has nickname "The Black Hammer" because people who work with her on a team challenge go home. However, as far as I can tell, has never been accused of sabotage. I don't think she does it at all, but just considering the number of challenges where it's happened, the rumor mill has been very silent. Compare her track record with Angelo, but Angelo has false accusation of being a saboteur.

[redpoint]

When Marcel chose people for his team, he chose people that HE thought he got along with. He had just done a challenge with Blaise and it didn't work out between them, and Angelo is a good guy, so of course he picked Angelo. He said in the interview that he thought he was friends with Mike. And Fabio said in his blog that he knew there was no way Marcel would chose him. There is bad blood between them since the special. So Dale didn't have to hurry to chose Fabio. The only foolish choice Marcel made was Tiffany over Carla.

[Anita]

Very interesting commentary by Marcel on why he lost, how he picked the wrong team, and how he'll never go on Top Chef again.

http://popwatch.ew.com/2011/01/20/top-chef-all-stars-episode-7-blog/

[TxGriff]

Anita- Geez. He really just needs to learn when to stop talking. He can talk about his team all he wants, but where is the explanation about why he own dishes failed? He didn't just go home because of bad leadership. If he produced great food, Tiffany probably would have gone home. Can't say I'm sorry to see him leave.

As for the Italian food debate, I'm going to let those much more eloquent than me (Dom) keep it going. I was really just using an out of context quote to elaborate an a completely different issue. Damn you Richard Blais and your TC soundbites.

[momjamin]

That EW interview is fascinating. His biggest problem was that he picked the wrong team? Given the 8 people he had to choose from, let's say his only criteria should have been "choose someone who will support my leadership." How different would his choices have been? Angelo, Tiffany, and Antonia are relatively mild-mannered and don't get in anyone's face. (Richard is also non-confrontational, but they were in the bottom together last week.) Marcel thought Mike was his buddy and was surprised when he wasn't completely behind him.

[Independent George]

I'm still not over the Five Man Band comparison. I can't think of anything else anymore. Damn.

[Polybus]

I re-watched the episode again last night and have these additional thoughts:

I loved Bourdain's comment about the performance of Team Etch: "Prison breaks have been done with more efficiency and better teamwork."

Fabio: "You're going down!"

The Black Hammer strikes again. (And I agree that Antonia doesn't do anything to make it happen. It just happens.)

Dale: "Antonia says to just drink the kool-aid." Maybe that was his message to Marcel by picking Tre.

Fabio was calling Richard "Richie" during Stew Room and Judge's Table. I thought that was funny. I don't think anyone has shortened his name before.

[JJ]

Read Bourdain's blog. I think his comments about being a cook versus a chef are obviously true, and he may be right to call Marcel out for being the former and not the latter, but I'm not so convinced by Dale's maturation as he seems to be. Don't get me wrong, I think Dale is an excellent cook. I've always thought so. But his ugly, petulant side is obviously just below the surface waiting to explode. His behavior with the wait staff was appalling. (Of all the top contenders, I still think he is the most likely to crash-and-burn.) I'm glad that the judges gave the win to Blais because he clearly deserved this one. Dale picked a good team (a winning team, as everyone has said) but he is still some ways from becoming a great leader. There is no doubt in my mind that, had the team been as uncooperative as Marcel's, that he would have gone off on a tirade. It was really the one-two combination of Blais (in the role of chef) and Fabio (FOH) that made them practically invincible.

One more thing. As someone who has worked as a head waiter in restaurants (in my earlier years), I just want to reiterate that what Fabio was able to do as host involves a number of skill sets that goes beyond being a "people person." There were a number of waiters under me, for example, who were much more friendly/chatty than I was, but they often had very poor sense of how to multi-task and insure that everything under their jurisdiction was running smoothly. With this in mind, there is no way to know for sure that Carla, for example, would have been good in this role. Nor is there any reason why Marcel should have known in advance that "fan favorite" Tiffany would be such a disaster. (Tiffany, in fact, is a perfect example of a personable, "people person," with terrible FOH skills.)

[dc]

A foodie blog entry by one of the RW diners. http://thegoodlifegourmet.blogspot.com/2011/01/top-chef-restaurant-wars-up-close-and.html (This was posted on chowhounds.)

Interesting reading his/her recollections of each dish (especially since we viewers can't taste it), especially where they differed from the judges. Delicious read.

Oh, the author loved Carla's dessert so much that they got the recipe after the meal!

[John Coctostan]

@JJ - I guess we view things differently, but I didn't see any behavior from Dale that I would call appalling. Clearly he was being rude in that moment, but nothing we were shown lets me conclude that he was like that all night. It was one instance - there could have been more of it or that could have been all there was. Dale gets the benefit of the doubt from me on this one.

Something I don't think anyone else has voiced is that a better choice for FOH for Etch might have been Mike. He's got a natural ability to be relaxed around anyone which would translate well to FOH, and I doubt he would have been as nervous or flustered as Tiffany appeared to be.

[jh]

@dc, it was a very interesting read to hear her take.

Taste is somewhat objective, but if 82% of the diners preferred Bodega, that's not close at all.

I am curious if service and food quality varied from the first wave to the second. Sometimes food and service are shaky at first because everyone is still finding the groove and it may take a few passes to work out the kinks, but you also have the advantage of getting the chefs and staff while they're still fresh and not exhausted from pushing out 100+ dishes.

Which is another reason why I liked the diners choosing the winners (only really works if the sample size is large enough and they're not housewives of whatever city)--consistency and deliciousness.

As I was watching the episode, I could see how some people were very much into the "look" of the dishes. The camera kept going to the one table where the girl at Etch that oohed and aahed at how pretty the plates looked. Not to say that plate presentation isn't important, but I had to roll my eyes because she was so over the top about it.

[Nsam]

That EW piece is indeed very interesting. I'm not a Marcel fan at all but I found his take on things strong and persuasive -- that is, as far as it went. I can reasonably believe that Isabella sandbagged Marcel's dish in the kitchen to focus on the proteins in his own dishes and then remorselesslly threw him under the bus at JT, and that the elves really do go overboard in giving him the asshole edit because, well, he gives them a lot of material to work with (!)

However, like many other intelligent people, Marcel sadly seems to lack the insight into himself that he does have into other people. Take responsibility for your actions, Marcel. You strut around abrasively like the alpha or wannabe alpha-dog that you are and put a big target on your back that way. And you're bad at making allies. Look at the others: Blais, solid alliances with the S4 people, especially Dale, and always looking to expand his network, as with his bromance with Fabio. Fabio knows how to charm, obviously, and also knows when to show his teeth. Same could be said about Isabella. Antonia, all-around good gal that she may be, is a tough cookie who knows how to maneuver, too. (As alluded to in someone's previous post, the Black Hammer moniker is not totally a matter of coincidence.)

Psychological warfare, we've now heard cheftestants call TC more than once. Marcel, whatever his strengths as a cook and as a TV character, ultimately is poorly equipped to win at this kind of warfare.

[karenology]

From Fabio's blog (thanks for the link!):

"Don’t get me wrong, I like Marcel passion, I like Marcel technique, what I don’t like about Marcel are his people skills, thumbs down to Marcel people skills, he needs to learn a lots."

Pitch for a new Bravo show: Fabio teaches Marcel people skills :)

[KinderJ]

Getting back to the simple versus easy Italian food debate, I put forward a recipe for Spagetti Carbonara I got from the Mario Battali iPhone app. Provided you have prepared your mis, the entire sauce can be prepared between the time the pasta is dropped in the water and the finished dish hits the table. Total ingredients for the sauce (I may have missed one, but it don't think so) are: Eggs, Parmigiano, Romano, Pancetta, Olive Oil, Salt, Pepper, the occasional ladleful of Cooking Water. That's it. And if you get the timing wrong, you have pasta with watery disgusting scrambled eggs. Get it right, and it becomes the most velvety, unctuous, umammi rich dish your heart could desire. Simple dish? You bet. Technique needed? Close to zero. Was this easy to design? Was this easy to develop? I really doubt it. I would wager people have been hammering away at it for a long, long time to get it down to the bare essentials.

To borrow a line 'Lifting the engine block out of a car with your bare hands is simple. It's not easy, but it's simple.'

[Skillet Doux]

Anon Man...

Sorry for the late reply, here. Was in the ER with the little one (all's well now).

First, regarding your examples, of course I don't mean to suggest that there aren't French dishes that are simple and Italian dishes that are complex. But cherrypicking a few examples doesn't negate that on the whole, French chefs do a whole lot more to manipulate their ingredients than Italian chefs do. It's just one example, but just this evening, I read a post about somebody trying to recreate Oeufs Benedictine:

http://chicago.grubstreet.com/2011/01/grant_achatz_just_gave_us.html

Have you *ever* seen an Italian recipe that involved that amount of manipulation? And even more "complex" Italian sauces still don't rise to that level. An Italian chef may throw a bunch of ingredients in the suacepan, but the French chef will strain it, reduce it and mount it before it's done. Besciamella is about as technically complex as Italian saucery gets... and that's a French sauce! I'm confused by your reference to dolceforte. Unless we're working under different understandings of what that is, it's a four or five ingredient sauce that's made by basically tossing them all in the pan and letting them simmer for 5-10 minutes. Technically speaking, that doesn't even hit the level of complication of the French mother sauces, to say nothing of the countless extensions and complex variations thereon.

I believe I said it already, but I'll repeat it. I never suggested that Italian cooking was any easier to do well. But easy and simple aren't the same thing. As I said above, sometimes something that's simpler is *harder* to do well.

And even the examples you note there don't pass muster. Bistecca alla Fiorentina? Rub it with olive oil, salt, pepper, some herbs and put it on the grill. Steak au poivre? Do approximately the same (different rub, different heat source), but when the Italian chef is done, the French chef continues on to make a sauce out of what's left in the pan. Duck confit? It's easy, but it's not simple. It's still three stage cookery. Cure the duck, then poach the duck, then saute the duck. 99 times out of 100, the Italian chef won't bother with all of that. He'll just take a piece and throw it on the grill. I'm admittedly a novice when it comes to Indian, but I'll tell you something I learned about Indian cooking that blew my mind. The same spice might be added to one dish during three different stages for three different effects. Sizzling it in oil while starting a masala emphasizes one aspect of the spice. Adding more once wet ingredients have joined the pan bring out different characteristics. Mixing in a bit right before serving or sprinkling some more on top is intended to emphasize yet another aspect of the same spice. Adding different ingredients at different times, sure, that I'm used to. But adding the *same* ingredient *three* times with intention of having a completely different effect with each addition? Of course, certain ragus have their complexities, but nothing on the level of what's flat-out routine for Indian cookery.

How about a personal anecdote? When I did my night at Posh restaurant, my idea was to try to do modern Italian that was still very simple and got at the heart of the ingredients. I was right on top of dishes 1, 2 and 4, but for the third dish, I provided the high concept and let Josh, the chef there, work out the details. Culinarily speaking, Josh comes from a French background, and even he remarked afterwards about how different our approaches were. His instinct was to do more and more and more... add a gastrique, add that, fold in some of this, reduce that, layer technique upon technique... and I kept pulling him back, no, that's too much, it's too far from a simple chicken dish, it's being manipulated too much. And he talked about how his instinct coming out of a French background was to do more to the dish, not less. The end result was that the third course, delicious as it was, was the one course that didn't feel Italian. The flavors were pure and delicious -- he's a hell of a chef -- but they weren't Italian, because the abundance of technique had brought the ingredients too far away from their raw state.

But the most important thing, which I'll stress again, is that Italian's simplicity is a *good* thing. Even more, it's *everything*. It precisely why Italian is so not French. And it's what makes it, to me, so satisfying on a visceral level. I can thrill to complicated combinations of ingredients and the complex layering of multiple techniques in other cuisines, but when I come home to Italian, there's a very, very close connection to the ingredients in their simplest, most natural state. Italian chefs, by nature, are loathe to stray too far from that. They're no less exacting in what they do, but they do less of it. That's what makes them who they are. That's what makes Italian food what it is. When you suggest that it's just as complex as other cuisines, my reaction is god, no, don't let it ever be as complex as other cuisines. The simplicity doesn't make it deficient. That's its strength and its soul. And it is, of course, your place to disagree -- and I'm glad that this is a place where we can do that and have a good discussion about it -- but I guess I'm just stymied that you don't see it that way.

[aaalex]

a few random, late thoughts: much as i love bourdain's blog, he was unfair to marcel. he says "a chef is a leader of cooks, period". well, yes, that sounds reasonable BUT a chef is also a CHOOSER of cooks. no chef in this world takes on a random (or in this case hostile) bunch of cooks in his kitchen. when angelo said he would have sent mike i. home for his insubordination, he was indicating one of a chef's chief weapons: "get the fuck out of my kitchen, until you're ready to do what i say." marcel, during an elimination challenge, obviously could not use that weapon.

in the real world, marcel would have hand picked the people working in his kitchen. bourdain makes his point several times, without thinking through exactly why marcel, while playing this game, COULD NOT work as a chef would. also: marcel was forced to work with his competitors. in the real world, a chef works with those who want to execute his vision. bourdain, for all the seeming sense of his observation has absolutely NO idea if marcel is a good chef or not, because he has not seen marcel in a "real world" setting. (funny how even someone as acute as bourdain can forget the difference between Top Chef and the real world.)

did anyone else find it amusing that one of marcel's flaws in his choice of chefs was foreshadowed at the start of the season? when fabio hosted the top chef special two seasons ago, and had the temerity to ask marcel about his conflicts during season 2, marcel snidely responded that he (marcel) had not watched fabio's season. if marcel HAD watched season 5, he would have known that fabio is easily the best FOH in top chef history. if he HAD watched season 5, he might have gone for fabio, despite his dislike of the man.

i have real sympathy for the poster who doesn't like richard blais. i was a fan of blais' during season 4, but this season, i find blais' attitude to fabio - mistrust, condescension - annoying. blais assumes - and perhaps fabio even accepts - his superior skill to fabio, but his assumption of superiority is rather like his assumption that he lost season 4 rather than stephanie winning it. more than that: blais' insecurity and whining - again shown in his attitude to fabio - are IMPOSED on the others. his negativity in the stew room this episode reminded me of lisa fernandes' negativity. blais obviously has more talent than fernandes, but at times he's a bit of a dark cloud.

domenic: i'm glad you added that clarification on simplicity. i understand and agree with everything you said, but i wonder if you aren't short changing something crucial in anon man's thoughts. ingredients - the number of them - are an aspect of complexity, of course. and the example you gave from indian cooking is, clearly, an example of "ingredient complexity". but as you alluded to, fewer ingredients call for another type of complexity. (this is an argument we have most seasons. if i remember right, we had the most prolonged arguments about simplicity - i don't mean me and you, i mean all of us on this blog - during season 5 when ariane was winning with "simple" dishes and fabio won an ec with roast chicken.) the complexity that comes from fewer ingredients is one of timing, cooking sense, knowledge of your ingredients and how they interact. the chef has to know/feel/sense more when he or she is using fewer ingredients, when the techniques are more straightforward. of course you have to have knowledge/feel/sense to master indian cooking, but it's all about timing and instinct (fairly complex matters) in both cuisines. the easiest example is, for instance, when you're making a custard. high-fat cream, milk, egg yolks, vanilla. most recipes call for heating the mixture until "just before it boils" and talk about the mixture being ready when it coats the back of a spoon. but i know people who simply can't make a custard. you can talk to them about the "feel" of the mixture when it's ready to take off the stove, but you're wasting your breath. something "inner" and undefinable is going on when you "know" it's the right time to take the custard off the stove. now, yes, custard making's a relatively common skill, but it still points to intricacies that aren't linked to the number of ingredients or elaborate techniques. (for someone who knows indian cuisine, btw, the steps you outline may not be perceived as "complex". i've heard a really great cook of indian food pooh-pooh her own abilities by doing the proverbial "it's easy. i learned this from my mother" manoeuvre.) nothing i've written contradicts anything you wrote, but it strikes me anon man is putting the emphasis on intangibles and cooking sense/talent while you're putting the emphasis on technique. two different kinds of complexity. two different kinds of simplicity. no?

[Skillet Doux]

Aaalex... I don't wish to turn this into a semantic argument, because that never ends well :-) But no, I disagree. A simple technique, no matter how expertly executed, is still a simple technique. Implicit in Anon Man's posts, I think, is the suggestion that neither French nor Italian cuisine are intrinsically more complex, and that the only thing separating them is style: specific techniques, common ingredients, etc. My point is that the cuisines are *fundamentally* different, as are the chefs who make them, in that while the French completely revolutionized culinary technique, the Italians (and this is all very broadly generalized, of course) do and always have tended to strive for simpler food... simpler flavors, simpler ingredients, simpler preparations, simpler techniques. Neither approach is right or wrong, nor is one better than the other. They're just different, using the word "simple" is one of the best ways to encapsulate those differences, and to deny that that difference exists is to deny one of the most important -- if not *the* most important -- philosophical distinctions between them.

[rabrab]

aalex, while you make a very sound point that Marcel's ability to lead was hampered by the fact that he had a limited selection of people to choose his team from, and that in the real world, he wouldn't have had to choose from chefs who were hostile to him, the fact is, he contributed greatly to creating that hostility in the first place.

Yes, in the real world, if an EC ends up with employees who won't follow his direction, he can fire them. But if he can't establish a relationship that isn't hostile, he's going to be firing a lot of them. And eventually, he's going to build a reputation that keeps good candidates from even considering working for him in the first place.

[aaalex]

domenic: yeah, okay. i concede. it is useful to distinguish french cuisine - which has had a big influence on italian cuisine - from italian. and "fussiness" is a good line in the sand. italian certainly isn't EASIER to do well. and i think you've got that covered, but i suspect anon man's point is about the condescension that MAY be behind the designation "simple". (bryanD's point about semantics is well taken.) it's still really tricky to make pasta by hand, though.

rabrab: no, i think you're doing the same thing bourdain is doing. you're confusing a competitor's relationship to his fellow competitors with real world relationships. marcel was participating in a contest, trying to pump himself up to give himself confidence. his WAY of playing was annoying to the others. but he was PLAYING, because top chef is a game. in his own kitchen, he'd have interviewed potential sous and line cooks and seen them at work before committing to them. his cooks would also know whose vision they were meant to execute (marcel's) and wouldn't veer from it, because their JOB is to execute marcel's vision. i'm sure in the real world marcel is a very good chef indeed. i believe him when he says he's easy to get along with. (tre's point was NOT that marcel was the only asshole on top chef, but that they were all assholes. marcel simply being a better imp than the others. tre and marcel seem to be friends, after all.) so, again: behaviour and ability on top chef is different from behaviour and ability in the real world.

but there's another point, here: an ec's bad behaviour in the kitchen - his or her reputation for nasty behaviour - does not in the least discourage cooks or chefs from working with him or her. if the ec's food is good, people will happily put up with the worst temper tantrums and intimidation. marco pierre white sounds like a really dreadful prick to work for. (he reduced gordon ramsey to tears.) but if he opened a restaurant tomorrow, the line up would be very long to work with him, because his reputation as a COOK is very high.

and, btw, i bet bourdain would be more difficult to work with than marcel. his anecdote about not being WILLING to help his friend get the respect of the other chefs in the kitchen is very telling, not about his friend but about him. bourdain has a thing about authority, obviously, and i bet part of him was pleased by the fact his friend could not control a kitchen that he could. bourdain is a great writer and all, but my bet is he'd be a prick to work for. just imagine that insolent and cutting wit at 7 in the evening when you're trying to concentrate on your work.

moreover: we sometimes criticize others for lacking the thing we know we lack,for behaviour we dislike in ourselves. with that in mind, bourdain's questioning of marcel's ability as a "chef" may have as much to do with bourdain's obsessions and inabilities as marcel's failings on this game show.

[JJ]

"I guess we view things differently, but I didn't see any behavior from Dale that I would call appalling. Clearly he was being rude in that moment, but nothing we were shown lets me conclude that he was like that all night"

John – I wasn't necessarily suggesting that it was something that happened all night. Rather, I was questioning this new-found maturity that people seem to be attributing to Dale. My question remains: if things had gone less smoothly at the Bodega restaurant would Dale have stood up much better than Marcel as team leader? (And for the record: I think appalling is a perfectly acceptable word for both the tone and content of Dale's comments to the bewildered servers. In what context is it acceptable to say "back the f--k off" to your wait staff?)

Again, these remarks are not meant to suggest that Dale is not an excellent cook. I just think he still has some years to go before he becomes a great chef. There's nothing wrong with this. He is still relatively young. I just wish a little of this generosity could have been thrown Marcel's way by Bourdain.

[rabrab]

aaalex: I have no doubt that Marcel is probably a fun guy to hang out with in real life. Or that he's easy to get along with (as long as you don't disagree with him). Or that if you have sufficient cachet in your field that there will always be some people who are willing to put up with you being a gigantic prick.

But TC is about how much fun you are to hang out with. Or never disagreeing. and Marcel certainly doesn't have the name or reputation to will make aspiring chefs willing to put up with being treated badly.

And if Marcel's team was made up of his competitors, well, Dale's was too. So it's not like that was a disadvantage that only Marcel had to face. The difference is that Dale built a team. Marcel didn't. Everybody was out for themselves, including Marcel. They didn't work together.

Which leads to a comment about why Richard won even though Dale was the team leader: At JT, one of the team said "He elevated all of our dishes." And unless the Elves were deliberately lying to us through the editing, not only did none of the others disagree with that assessment, they actively agreed with it. They agreed that he made the team better -- even though they were also his competitors.

[twelden]

aaalex - I think your points regarding Marcel are very well taken and well-made. Having only witnessed Marcel in the hybrid fiction/reality construct that is TC, I am not sure we, nor Bourdain, have adequate information to judge how he might perform in a real world kitchen unencumbered by the game.

But I can't help but ask: in jumping to conclusions about Bourdain's abilities as a chef, aren't you guilty of the very the same thing for which you take Bourdain to task? Bourdain's public persona, so carefully crafted for and by books, TV and blogs, is merely the "character" he lets us see. Is it fair to extropolate about his abilities as a chef, or to opine that he'd "be a prick to work for," based on nothing more than selective soundbites made when Bourdain is arguably "in character"?

[Nicole]

@ John Coctostan, who said "Something I don't think anyone else has voiced is that a better choice for FOH for Etch might have been Mike. He's got a natural ability to be relaxed around anyone which would translate well to FOH, and I doubt he would have been as nervous or flustered as Tiffany appeared to be."

I agree, and I had the same question watching. I could be wrong about this, but my read on it while watching the show is that FOH is not as respected as working in the kitchen, and, moreover, I don't think it's a coincidence that aside from Fabio, women tend to end up as FOH during restaurant wars.

Just did a quick check of recent seasons via Wikipedia:
Season 7: Kelly and Alex, who was clearly the least respected person left
Season 6: Laurine and Eli
Season 5: Radhika and Fabio
Season 4: Stephanie and Spike

So perhaps I'm wrong, as this looks fairly balanced gender-wise. But my perception is that it's kind of a territorial thing, and that Mike would not be happy with being pulled out off the line and assigned to FOH. Also, it was clear that Tiffany did not think FOH would be her strength, but the rest of the folks kind of strong-armed her into it. She could have insisted, but I think the default way of choosing is either "Who do we not want in the kitchen?" OR "Who's a sweet gal with a pretty face?"

And of course, YMMV.

[garik16]

There is an aspect of Marcel's reputation which bites him in the ass on Top Chef. Richard has a history of sometimes going over-complex, but his ideas are generally regarded as good, helpful, and of a man who generally knows what he's doing. He also has a reputation for being a good partner and willing to listen to others.

Marcel on the other hand has the reputation of a guy who doesn't care what others think and does complexity for complexity's sake, but he doesn't know what he's doing to the food.

These reputations are each chef's own creation, and they do harm/help their respective chefs. With Richard, they make people want to work with him, and make them willing to let him give them tips and hints. With Marcel, they make the same people want to avoid him, do their own things, and ignore Marcel's advice.

But this IS each competitor's OWN FAULT. Their reputation is their own creation - for example here, Marcel used foam TWICE despite his team not wanting him to....WHAT WAS THAT ABOUT?!

Whereas Richard has known in some team challenges then to dial it back a little, and if a technique doesn't work (his smoker in season 4), he says Okay and moves on.

I don't feel sorry for Marcel...he created two horrible dishes and his own reputation prevented him from handling the rest of his team any better.

[aaalex]

rabrab: i think you're confusing the issue. i was speaking to bourdain's criticism of marcel. i don't think bourdain has enough information about marcel to know - even by his own definition - if marcel is a good chef or not, because bourdain has never - to my knowledge, i may be wrong - seen marcel in a real kitchen situation, as opposed to this fictional kitchen game that is top chef. i'm guessing marcel, who has been an ec, is as good a "chef" as anyone else we're watching on top chef.

i think your second point is that marcel doesn't have a sufficiently high reputation as a cook to keep firing and replacing sous-chefs at will. i never said he did. i was responding to your point that ...

"Yes, in the real world, if an EC ends up with employees who won't follow his direction, he can fire them. But if he can't establish a relationship that isn't hostile, he's going to be firing a lot of them. And eventually, he's going to build a reputation that keeps good candidates from even considering working for him in the first place."

the world doesn't really work like this, from what we know of kitchens. executive chefs have varying reputations. most of them have been known to be dicks in their time. but the talented ones have no trouble finding sous-chefs and line cooks. the less talented ones learn ways to keep their talented underlings, obviously. but the very fact marcel does NOT have a reputation as someone impossible to work with would seem to indicate he may, indeed, be a good "chef". in any case, bourdain's point about marcel, that he seems not to be a "chef", is unconvincing, in light of the evidence he has at his disposal: ie. marcel's performance on what is, after all, a fairly trivial - if entertaining - game show.

the point i made about marcel's team being made up of competitors was made to further the point that the situation on top chef is nowhere like real life. it wasn't made to show that marcel had greater problems than dale. au contraire, they're ALL competitors. they're ALL in the realm of the non-senses.

your point about dale and richard shows only one thing: for this round, they played the game better than marcel did. it's as simple as that. and in no way does it mean that marcel is inferior as a chef to dale or to richard. it means he didn't play this round as well as they did and, so, he lost. (from the editing, i thought tiffany looked the more deserving loser, but marcel's foam parade must have been diabolical to eat.)

twelden: well, yes, you're right. bourdain is playing a game/role, too. so, by saying "my bet is that he'd be a prick to work for" i'm engaging in pure speculation. but that's WHY i prefaced my speculation by saying "my bet is ...". in other words, this is what i'd put money on, not what i know. ( i use the word "bet" at least three times while i speculate about bourdain.)

to your question "is it fair to extrapolate ...", i can only scratch my head and wonder how you think i've been unfair. this is a blog on which each and every one of us offers an opinion based on what we've seen on top chef, a reality show. i'm not asserting that i know anything about bourdain beyond the information i've been given on television or through his books. nor do i think - or did i say - that i thought it unfair for bourdain to say what he said about marcel. he's guessing, and he's guessing in an entertaining way. can't i guess about bourdain, too? (admittedly, it'd be difficult to be as entertaining as he is.)

[aaalex]

twelden: ha! i did, in fact, say i thought bourdain was "unfair" to marcel. i should have re-read my post. i don't actually think it's unfair. and i should have qualified that word. so, in the words of the late emily litella: "nevermind"

[Amanda P.]

I think the biggest fallacy on Restaurant Wars is the that "team leader" has to be EC. It seemed that Dale's team was ok with the assignment of tasks (Dale = EC, Fabio = FOH, etc), and Marcel's team was not. The leadership skills that Marcel seems to be lacking are things that you learn with more experience. Marcel IS still young. At his age, I couldn't lead a team, even though I (sorry for the immodesty here) was usually the most talented person in the group. I was terrible at managing the people - I functioned much better as a 2IC or as the workhorse in the group. My job now is to lead teams (and I don't get to pick my team members), so I hope that I've learned in the meantime to identify the right people to do the right jobs within a team - even if that means I step back.

The longer Marcel works in groups, whether as EC in his own kitchen or as part of a team of competitors, one would hope that his ability to identify the right person to do a job would improve. I believe that Etch would have functioned better if Marcel had stood up at the beginning and said "who should be EC?" Because he assumed that he should be EC (and I can understand why he would), he tried to force the team into his personality and vision, and that was obviously not the way to win. I took Bourdain's "cook vs. chef" comment as a reflection of this skill, which was obviously lacking this week.

[jh]

I was trying to figure out how Marcel, Tiffany, Antonia, Mike, and Angelo would best be placed.

For EC- Angelo or Antonia. They along well (enough) with everyone and have enough presence in the kitchen. Willing to speak up when things go wrong, and can help diffuse tense situations.

FOH- Mike or Antonia. Mike can put on the smooze if he wants to, and Antonia has people and organizational skills.

Marcel is confined to the back, and does his own dish for the most part. He tends to work best by himself, so once a concept is agreed upon, let him do his thing. If his is dish going off track, EC needs to step in.

Tiffany is a weak link in my eyes. Not suited for FOH, as we saw, but not stellar in the kitchen. Possibly in the role of workhorse with some guidance, but not Marcel style guidance.

Ultimately, I think it would be best to have Angelo as EC. Antonia is working the line to make sure everything get expedited.
Although also strong and needed in the kitchen, Mike is delegated to FOH. Marcel and Tiffany in the back.

I considered flipping Antonia and Mike and putting her for FOH (she really is kinda a jack of all traits), where I think she would actually do a better job than Mike. She seems to get less flustered in chaotic situations and can problem solve quickly on her feet. She also has the people skills and attention to detail and manage. I ended put Mike there because I think he would do a decent job, and it would separate him and Marcel.

[matthew]

If you want confirmation of why Skillet Doux is so highly regarded, just go over to Cinema Blend to see the hacks rate the contestants.

http://www.cinemablend.com/television/Top-Chef-All-Stars-Power-Rankings-Week-7-29562.html

They've been tough on Carla all season. Fine, they don't like her, but how Angelo is still at the top and Dale is 3rd, and Antonia two spots below Mike is a mystery to me.

I have a theory about why these folks, and others rate certain chefs so high or low, no matter how they actually perform week-to-week, but I'll save it for now.

[Anon man]

matthew, I'm intrigued by that comment. Perhaps at a later date you'll reveal your conclusion on them. I don't read that blog regularly, and based on their ratings, I'm not wasting time by doing so.

[garik16]

Matthew they appeared to have Richard at the top in weeks 1-5, which shows that that blog basically had preconceived notions to start....and are really really ridiculously unwilling to change their beliefs as the season goes on.

Just odd.

[Independent George]

Matthew - I'm not familiar with that site, but I would guess that they're television people, and not necessarily food people. I think that's a distinction worth noting. Interestingly enough (at least, to me, anyway), I keep Dom's blog bookmarked in the 'Food' folder of my browser, and the official Top Chef website in the 'Television' folder.

[jh]

I never read the Cinemablend blog until it was mentioned last week in this blog. I looked through their previous weeks, and it really was a complete waste of time (and not in the good sense).

They have some pretty mean things to say about Carla, which I think are completely unfounded and unjustified. If they were going for snarky or even Bourdain-ish, they whiffed a bunch of poo. The fact they thought that Carla was "the worst part of restaurant Bodega" is complete BS. It's akin to saying, the worst person on the gold medal relay during the 2008 Olympics was Garret Weber-Gale. She made blueberry pie. Richard made potato chips.

The placement that also baffles me is Tiffany. She's done nothing this season, barely had any top mentions, bombs RW with a bad dish and FOH, and she's still ahead of Carla?

matthew, there's a reason you frequent and comment on this blog. The comments posted last week (which pretty much dissed their rankings) have mysteriously vanished. I wouldn't waste my time over there. They don't deserve the traffic.

[Danny]

Didn't want to do it but had to check out the Cinema Blend rankings. It seems like they have their prejudices and actual facts and performances are not going to get in their way. There is absolutely nothing in any way that justifies them saying that Carla's dish was the worst dish at Bodega. If fact, if you bother to read the blogs of the judges as well as the diner that blogged, it is clear that everyone loved Carla's dish. Fabio even got the recipe to give to one of the diners because they were so enamored of the dish.

I will admit that I adore Carla. I know that she messes up. There are many things about Carla that are charming and one of the most charming is her willingness to recognize that she messed up and to totally own up to her mistakes. Marcel, on the other hand, will not admit to any mistakes. It's always someone else's fault, or the judges are weak and biased or some other excuses. Marcel lost the QF because Bourdain didn't taste his sauce and Angelo serves everything in a spoon. But if you read Bourdain's blog, he did, in fact, have enough of the sauce and to the best of my knowledge, Angelo's entire dish was not served in a single spoon. Cinema Blend, like Marcel, won't let pesky facts get in the way of their prejudices. They say that the QF was a very tight 4 way race. But if you read the blogs, it is clear that it was a tight 3 way race with no one being a fan of Marcel's dish. Marcel gets scolded about his foams so that causes him to increase the foams. He even slipped one in with RW even though it had apparently been agreed on beforehand that there was not to be a foam.

I almost would like to see two rankings. One ranking would place the chef in the TC contest and the other would place the chefs in the order that I would like to eat their food based on their overall performance. For me that would be Angelo, Dale, Carla, Blais, Mike, Antonia, Tre, Fabio, Tiffany and Marcel. I just realized when I looked at this list, I would actually rate them about the same on the TC rankings. How cool is it to write a post only to see one change their mind as they write! So, for now, I don't need a second list.

Bottom line for me is that I can't think of a single dish that Marcel has made that I've craved with the possible exception of the Urchin dish in Hawaii. To me, the dish that best sums up Marcel's problems is the salad in Hawaii. He wanted to make the dish so that he could show off his MG skills with the vinegar pearls. But it was obvious to everyone that the constant humidity of Hawaii (not as bad as Thailand but consistently humid)was going to imperil his concept. But even if it came out exactly as he wanted, he decided that one of the four dishes that he was going to make that was a meal of a lifetime was going to be a salad - a salad that was being made just to show off his supposed MG skills.

If given a choice between Carla's deconstructed blueberry pie and Marcel's smoking cauldron it is hard to imagine very many people picking his dish over Carla's.

I do think that there is a fair amount of sexism involved in the way that some rate her. Not only is she a woman, she doesn't strut about like a raging Alpha on roids. She is polite, caring and doesn't let the heat of the moment overwhelm her. I think that there are some people who will not give her her due because she is not out pounding her chest and doing a Ramsay. This may be why she likes catering more than working in a restaurant. I would bet that if Carla announced that she would like to be an EC at a restaurant she would be flooded with offers but she loves what she does. I'm just guessing but I would bet that Marcel's employment possibilities would be more bleak. If I wanted to hire an EC, I would be very nervous about bringing Marcel into the fold.

[Anon man]

Well reasoned, Dom. I should pick through that, but its dawn and the coffee is kicking in. I see your point about the number of steps, but I guess I look at a recipe with 80 steps and don't see it as complicated, but just long. Let's look at duck confit. Sure, there are several steps, but the steps are simple to do. It might be that we're pushing two ends of some pasta solely on conflicting definitions of simple. We're in agreement that "simple" isn't easy in this context, but I think I have difficulty looking at a long recipe and being blown away with its complexity, rather than not breaking it down into the various steps and thinking each one is relatively straight-forward.

Also, you and aaalex touched on my other bugaboo here, the argument that Italian food is derived from French food. Certainly, modern French food has had influence on modern Italian, but historically, its Italian/Roman food that created the base for French food. And, maybe that's why I get the most riled up on this discussion. When I hear people call Italian food simple, its usually in the same breath with discussion its supposed derivation from French food. The implication being Italian food is, for a lack of a better term, "dumbed down" French food. Clearly, you don't think that, but I've heard the meme repeated enough, that it gets my dander up.

So, let's leave it at that. I don't particularly find long, multi-step French recipes terribly complicated, just long. I think if I were to point to cooking that I find "complicated", I would point to MG and the stuff like they do at Alinea, etc. Maybe its the modern technique that throws me, but there's something inherently difficult about adding some powder to something, freeze-drying, breaking up, plating on the tip of a pin, etc. that seems light years different than just roasting, reducing, mounting to make a standard French meat and sauce combo.

Oh, on Carla in RW. She made a blueberry pie. If you love blueberry pie, I'm sure it was awesome. But, I think the main knock on it was what Ludo said: its good, but it isn't something he would want every day, the implication being that Fabio's dessert and coffee course would be. He's just one guy, and maybe he doesn't especially like fruit desserts, who knows. I think Carla's real problem in RW is she didn't get much airtime. I bet if she had been on Marcel's team, she would have done FOH and dessert (like Fabio did- by the way, this makes sense as you can often do dessert early and plate it relatively quickly), and her service and her dessert would have been the only nice things they had to say about the place.

[Zyglor]

Kiaralian quantum cookery is much more complicated than all of your simplistic Earthborn cuisines put together, times something else!

[Skillet Doux]

Zyglor... it's true, Kiaralians do all kinds of crazy stuff with their food. I just wish they wouldn't slather everything with Glagnar sauce.

[aaalex]

anon man/domenic: the idea that there's such a thing as "italian cuisine" independent of other national cuisines is, at best, a useful fantasy. at worst, it's a gross oversimplification. it isn't as if some venus in chef's whites rose from the mediterranean and gave a "libro de arte coquinaria" to some unsuspecting italian cook some time in the 4th century BC.

"roman cuisine" was deeply influenced by greek, etruscan, middle eastern cuisines, which also influenced each other. and why not? europe is a melting pot of trading nations. the greeks influenced the italians who influenced the french who influenced the italians who influenced the greeks ... and you need to throw in the spanish and the north africans and the far easterns, too.

if you look at the first "italian" cookbooks we have - from the middle ages - the cuisine is EXACTLY as complex, the recipes EXACTLY as elaborate as the french cookbooks we have from the same period. (my favourite cookbooks from the middle ages are english ones, the ones where a recipe might call for you to bury a quantity of bread in your back yard for three months. as a FIRST step.) the "simple" italian cuisine domenic is speaking about is largely a modern invention. and the notion of "simplicity" domenic is promoting is heavily influenced by the idea of a "nouvelle cuisine". so, you could say, domenic's version of "italian cuisine" is influenced by french thinking, but it's not that clear cut. if you look at the wiki's tenents of "nouvelle cuisine" you find - among other tenents - the following:

- A rejection of excessive complication in cooking.
- Cooking times for most fish, seafood, game birds, veal, green vegetables and pâtés were greatly reduced in an attempt to preserve the natural flavors. Steaming was an important trend from this characteristic.
- The cuisine was made with the freshest possible ingredients.
- Large menus were abandoned in favor of shorter menus.
- Strong marinades for meat and game ceased to be used.
- They stopped using heavy sauces such as espagnole and béchamel thickened with flour based roux, in favor of seasoning their dishes with fresh herbs, high quality butter, lemon juice, and vinegar.
- They used regional dishes for inspiration instead of cuisine classique dishes ...

obviously, the "simplicity" behind "nouvelle cuisine" is itself influenced by regional european cooking - including italian cooking. so, it's only for convenience that we rigidly delineate the cuisines of the different european cultures. when domenic writes

"My point is that the cuisines are *fundamentally* different, as are the chefs who make them, in that while the French completely revolutionized culinary technique, the Italians (and this is all very broadly generalized, of course) do and always have tended to strive for simpler food... simpler flavors, simpler ingredients, simpler preparations, simpler techniques."

i understand what he's saying and i get where he's coming from, but it's a total fantasy, if judged against how the world of culture works. the FRENCH could be said to have striven for "simpler flavours, simpler ingredients, etc" as much as the italians.

just as importantly, domenic is speaking as if "italian cuisine" were some fixed, readily definable phenomenon. not at all the case. "italian cuisine" is a living thing, always changing, susceptible to influences. (saffron from the middle east, tomatoes from the new world, etc.) if, tomorrow, "italian cuisine" became more elaborate, more favourably inclined to complex sauces, etc., it wouldn't be any less "italian", except in the minds of those who'd developed too rigid ideas of what "italian cuisine" means. (another thing to consider: there are parts of italy where what the french call "classic cuisine" ("complex" in domenic's sense) is very much prized.)

as a kind of amusing fantasy, there's no problem with all this. given how he defines things, domenic is right about "italian cuisine". but when it makes you unhappy, as it seems to make you, anon man, to hear of french influence on italian cooking, maybe it makes sense to step back and consider the way culture works. italian cooking has had as much influence on french cooking as french cooking as had on italian. italian cooking is/has been/may again be as "complex" as french cooking. we're not talking about sciences, here. we're talking about art.

please forgive me, domenic and anon man, if all this sounds pompous and obvious.

[Skillet Doux]

Aaalex... all true. And, I would hope, a given in the context of any food discussion. Call it a necessary generalization if you wish. But none of this, I think, negates the point, which is that if you're going to choose adjectives to describe Italian cuisine in relation to other popular ethnic cuisines -- inasmuch as they exist today -- "simple" is a pretty darn good place to start. An argument against that is, I think, an argument against generalization. And then we're back into semantics.

[nomnomnom]

Maybe lost in all this is that you guys can chat about the relative value of the cuisine another week as it appears this episode is bumped for unknown reasons.

Ratings are not very strong. Lower than S7 even.

[bryanD]

I enjoyed you spiel, aaalex. And novelle cuisine can not indeed be underestimated in its impingement upon modern food consciousness. ("impingement"? Yes! Curse thou, grassy-tasting, undercooked veggies!)
Yet I must stake out "Italian" food styles and folkways by my own greatest common denominators metrics that define the Italian food cultures (plural) to this day. The "southern" is easy and absolutely unassailable as to source: "Greek". The "classical" Greek city-states dominated the littoral of the ENTIRE Mediterranean zone for a looooong time. Carthage, Tyre, and Troy, the founders of Rome, blood enemies mostly yet all Greek colonists or cast-offs due to congenital Greek political instability. (Even the ruling house of the Jewish tetrarchy in Christ's time were half-Greek; and Cleopatra, a Greek Ptolemy, of course. (We are talking Everybody, here, folks!))
Skip ahead to the fall of Rome. Latin in the south? NO. According to historical evidence, Italy south of Rome NOW becomes (reverts to?) "Magna Grecia" under Byzantine (Greek) influence, and the Greek tongue of the Roman upper classes is suddenly being spoken by EVERYBODY in this degraded state--admittedly odd, but there it is.
All this to say, using Our Terms Here: these Greek-dominated areas and subcultures exalt "simple" food that has clear analogies and duplicates define by Mare Nostra to this day. Pure honey, fresh or preserved fish served straight-up, raw fruit and vegetables, unflavored yogurt, quick bread, "pizza!!!!". This "style" of cuisine (I submit) reflects cultures of stratified society of great historical endurance but rather horrid political conditions of slavery, bondage, peonage, etc, lorded over by a foreign ruling class (Greek or half-Greek, eventually Norman, Arab, Ottoman, French, etc). Factor in the philosophically-inspired original Greeks to favor *ostentatiously* "simple" foods (passed on to the early Romans, of course), divided by despotic Greek tendencies to rule and misrule occupied lands and eventually lose them to the four winds and you have....Simple food. Fast food. *Your Label Here*

Now, as for the North? The opposite foundation story: France was "First Nation" in the "middle ages". This meant: ANY duchy or realm anywhere NEAR the borders of the hyperactive French state (deep breath!) HAD BETTER BE *STABLE* OR IT WOULD BE REPLACED AT THE INSTIGATION OF FRANCE. Cold fact: France did not wish to waste its royal time signing pacts and treaties with Loooosers! Only mighty men may be France's friend! (and possible in-law! heh-heh)

Naturally this prerequisite encouraged...stability (after some well-placed neighbors' heads roll)! And notably long-running Italian ruling houses in The North resulted: Medicis, Sforzas, Viscontis, etc,etc were the result. Happily, an infrastructure and a middle class emerged organically, along with bourgeois food concepts aping the native rulers' aping of the French: the true beginnings of "cuisine" which was anything but "simple". (Of course, peasant food existed here as "peasant food" exists everywhere. I imagine that peasant food in the north might have been subjected to a "style" criterion more often than in the desperate South, though!: submit Mother In Law joke here: (idea-starter: "Red flannel hash AGAIN?" or "This mead is apple!! I like Pear! Screw it, just pour me some Liebfraumilch!")

"Maybe lost in all this is that you guys can chat about the relative value of the cuisine another week as it appears this episode is bumped for unknown reasons."---nomnomnom

Tut-tut, nomnomnom! We're all bi-, bi-, bi-chewgum&walk here!
(Although an ep-bump DOES suck! I expect 1 more after this if my Dick Tracy chronograph is correct.)

@Matthew: Oh, I got a theory about that **Blend** site, too. But it's super-dooper un-PC and co-stars amyl nitrate, so I'll resist!

[aaalex]

"all true. And, I would hope, a given in the context of any food discussion."

well, no, not exactly, dominic. anon man's peeve over the idea of french influence on italian cuisine would seem to indicate he DOESN'T accept the unravellable intermingling of cuisines as a given. he insists on the priority of italian influence, without thinking through where "italian" or "roman" come from. and i think - i don't want to put words in his mouth - he downplays the influence of nouvelle cuisine on other european cuisines, perhaps from a slightly jingoistic pride in what is "italian". (you can correct me if i'm wrong, anon man.)

and i think you've gone a good ways up the same river he has. "french cuisine", if we're talking about "la nouvelle cuisine" can just as easily and readily (and rightly) be called "simple". you've used a limited and cliched version of "french cuisine" ("classic french cuisine") to make a point, ignoring the push for "simplicity" that is one of the hallmarks of modern french cooking. yes, of course, "french cuisine" hasn't always been "simple", but neither has italian. when you write "the Italians (and this is all very broadly generalized, of course) do and always have tended to strive for simpler food.", this is simply untrue. "italian cuisine" has been a number of things in its history. "simple" is only one of them.

just as problematic, in your designation "simple", is how "simple" fits italian cuisine so well that we can use the word to distinguish italian cuisine from "la nouvelle cuisine", say, or from the usually forgotten, northern european cuisines: swedish cuisine has been for some time as devotedly "simple" as italian cuisine or la nouvelle cuisine or, for that matter, japanese cuisine. is "italian cuisine" really more "simple" than japanese cuisine? isn't it true that the word "simple" can be a good place to start for any number of cuisines?

i don't think being contra-generalization leads us to arguments about semantics. what it does is it makes it difficult for us to discuss ideas - tendencies, influences, etc. - that are useful when talking about cooking. that's why i conceded your point about the simplicity of italian cuisine. i knew where you were coming from. but at the heart of your argument there is an idea - the "simple" - that is more complex than you seem willing to accept. if we're just informally talking on a blog, your use of the word is no problem at all. but if you're being serious, joo got some 'splainin to do, baby.

[aaalex]

nom(3): really? numbers are down for the all-star season? where did you see the ratings? are they down for every episode or just overall?

during the first season of TC masters, there was much discussion, hereabouts, about whether the show should be primarily a cooking show or a reality tv show with plenty of drama. the high ratings probably come with the high drama. so, i'd have expected this season to do better than the last one, what with everybody having a fave chef and cheering him/her on. i wonder if fans of jen, say, or tiffani or etc. tune out - as they threaten to on the blogs - and lower the ratings when their faves hit the skids?

[Skillet Doux]

"isn't it true that the word "simple" can be a good place to start for any number of cuisines?"

For a great many, certainly. I don't mean to suggest that Italian in its entirety occupies one end of the spectrum with the totality of global cuisine to its right. Would you feel more comfortable if I were to say that modern Italian cuisine has, in a very general sense, a greater tendency towards simplicity in ingredients, techniques and preparations, particularly as compared to those most frequently discussed these days in food circles? I feel like I'm simply adding qualifiers here for the sake of adding them. Which doesn't mean I don't believe them, but it seems unnecessarily verbose. Isn't it fair to simply say that one of Italian cuisine's greatest strengths is its simplicity and leave it at that, at least within the context of the original discussion over whether or not it was insulting to Italians and Italian food to call it simple?

"Always has been" gets me into trouble, you're correct, and I should have chosen my words more carefully, there. You're right that much Nouvelle Cuisine threatens to dash the broad comparison, but even so, my gut instinct -- which I may regret having shared once I've thought about it some more -- is to say that as practiced by so many of its luminaries, I feel like Nouvelle still has/had a tendency towards a certain preciousness that didn't exactly scream simple food, even if its flavors were pure and few (and I don't mean that in any way as a slam on Novelle).

I concede that I may have been a little overzealous with my language in framing the point. But I do believe that the point stands.

[Wangus]

I can't contribute to this discussion in any meaningful way: the closest I've come to Italian food is cinghiale and aldo's in Baltimore little Italy.

BUT, I want to let those involved know that this might be one of the most fascinating reads I've had the pleasure to witness. I'm learning a ton, and I've always believed that there's nothing greater than listening to a person talk about something that he or she is passionate in.

So thank you to those contributing for being educational, for being courteous, and for being passionate.

[aaalex]

domenic: i share your gut instinct. i'm a lover of italian food and, especially as i've grown older, i've found it more and more difficult to deal with the elaborate sauces i, too, associate with french cooking. (i can't even stand bechemels any more and they're used in french AND italian.)

i was reacting to your rhetoric, mostly. i do think "simple" can be used to designate any number of cuisines - including (mi dispiace) nouvelle and french provincial cuisines. and i am kind of intrigued by how one would go about distinguishing the simplicity of (the general idea of) japanese cuisine from the simplicity of (the general idea of) modern italian. but i think, in the end, words like "simple" and "complex" are like black boxes in diagrams of electrical circuitry. (the black box is used to designate a power source, even though the designer doesn't know what the source will be or how much power will be needed.) they don't really mean much, until you've defined them and then they tend to mean even less, because they tend to get reduced to a kind of banality.

simple = no elaborate sauces
simple = no long recipes
simple = not too many ingredients

once you actually set out to define "simple", i think you find yourself thinking: "hmmm ... most european and american cuisines either are now or have been in their past "simple"." so, when you point to one cuisine (italian in this case) and say it's "simple", you aren't really saying enough to distinguish it from other cuisines. not to say you're wrong to call italian "simple". just that ... well, you catch my drift. "simple" is exactly what you called it "a necessary generalization", something that allows us to have an amusing conversation.

but on the matter of the complexity of italian cuisine.
here are a couple of medieval italian "recipes":

a Venitian spice mixture, used for any number of foods:

2 rounded tablespoons freshly ground black pepper (16g)
2 rounded tablespoons ground cinnamon (16g)
2 rounded tablespoons ground ginger (16g)
11/2 tablespoons saffron threads, loosely measured, crushed to a powder in a mortar or with your fingers (4g)
3/4 teaspoon ground cloves (2g)
(almost "indian", no?)

and one of my favourite medieval italian meals:

Inside Out Stuffed Fresh Sardines or Anchovies

(as given on the delightful medieval kitchen page: http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/706842.html)

To stuff anchovies or sardines, put them in hot water after having removed the heads and bones so that they are open along the back. Then grind marjoram, rosemary, sage, good spices, saffron, and the flesh of a few fish. Fill the anchovies or sardines with this stuffing so that the skin is next to the stuffing and the outside in. Then fry them in oil. They may be eaten with lemon juice.

In your wildest culinary dreams did you ever imagine opening a fish from the back, removing the bones and head without piercing the belly skin, spreading the skin with a stuffing, and closing the fish so that the flesh is on the outside, and then frying it? Yet this is what the author of this recipe suggests—and other writers as well. Maestro Martino splits a suckling pig along the backbone, turns it inside out like a sock, and then roasts it (see recipe 50); an eel is renversée in Le Ménagier de Paris, or rovesciata in Italian sources, then cooked flesh-side out.

really, the idea that italian cooking has ALWAYS been "simple" is kind of amusing, you've got to admit.

[KinderJ]

aaalex-

Moving into the land of super pedantry, I would dispute the assertion that 'Italian' food even existed between, say, the fall of the western Roman Empire and 1815. There was certainly food from the Italian peninsula, and there was a largely common language and culture, but there were profound regional differences. My Grandmother told me that when she went over to Italy in 1945, the Neapolitan accent and dialect was considered so strong as to be almost unintelligible to people in the north.

Venice, an example you mentioned in your fascinating post, was an independent city state with a strong spice trade with the Levant for much of it's history. It was that trade which formed the basis of it's immense wealth, and it was the opening of the Atlantic and Pacific trade routes which began it's collapse as a regional power. Contrast Venice of 1350 and, say, Modena or Isernia (picked the last name at random) of the same era. I strongly suspect you would find a more dramatic variation of cuisine then than you would find if you contrasted the cities today. To pick a potentially relevant historical tidbit (may have been mentioned above) various parts of northern Italy were owned by other nations comparatively recently. I believe Genoa was French, Venice administered by Austria, other northern territories by Switzerland, etc. To what degree was there an 'Italian' food, as opposed to the food of various regions and towns? Was it still 'Italian' in an Austrian ruled Venice, a city which did not exist when the Italian Peninsula was last unified?

One last note, in reference to other, inferior, TC bloggers. Gawker regularly has someone run reviews of TC. I will quote: "Cook, cook, cook, boring, boring, boring." Yeah. Gonna. Just. Walk. Away...

[aaalex]

kinderj: that's a really good question. modern italy comes about with garibaldi. previous to the 1800s, it was city states, as you point out. (i've been to naples more recently and the dialect - spoken by the men who were working the train - was incomprehensible to me. i listened to their (to my ears) mumbles for miles without catching much but the occasional word) maybe we SHOULD use the word "italian" to designate the culture of the country that came into being with garibaldi, but i think it's pretty hard to draw a line in the sand like that. venice influences florence which influences rome, etc. so, it's kind of difficult to keep them apart, culture-wise or cuisine-wise.

(i remember reading, i wish i could remember where, of a european survey done to see which countries were most zenophobic. it was some time in the eighties when the north-to-south migration was strong, with the turks in germany and north africans going to france. the results were what you'd expect. the dutch mistrusted the french, the french mistrusted the germans, etc. the only exceptions were greece and italy. the greeks and the italians had less problems with foreigners than with greeks or italians from other parts of their country. in other words, the florentines mistrusted napolitains MORE than they did the french or the dutch, etc. the athenians were more suspicious of cretans than of germans or belgians. something about the wars between city-states makes this kind of understandable ...)

on the other hand .. the different parts of italy are STILL pretty proudly different. if we go down that road, we could legitimately question if there IS such a thing as "italian cuisine" at all ...

[aaalex]

i meant "xenophobic", of course.
(too late at night, too early in the morning)

and the medieval recipes are at ...
http://www.press.uchicago.edu/Misc/Chicago/706842.html

[KinderJ]

I read a wonderful line in the Economist once. "I am a Florentine. A Tuscan if I must, but an Italian? Never!"

[aaalex]

kinderj: that quote says it all.
pretty great country, though. i'd give alot to be in siena right now, instead of freezing my arse off in toronto.

[Anon Man]

aaalex and kinderj, yes, these are good distinctions. As someone alluded to earlier, modern "northern" and "southern" are very different. Italy, this is especially true due to the fractured history until relatively recently. (I still know a few elders who refer to the modern Italian language as "Tuscan" as compared to Sicilian that they knew as a youth.) But, let's be fair about that, all large European countries have regional differences. Provencal v. Alsatian? Andalusia v. Galicia? There are differences there too.

[aaalexis]

anon man: all european countries? how about ALL countries? i don't think the u.s.a. is what you'd call homogeneous, culturally or kitchen-wise. and in canada, the provinces are pretty proudly distinct: newfoundland being a fur piece from kwebec. (modern italian, the language, IS basically "tuscan", Dante being the model)

the difference between the u.s. and italy, though, is that the italian city states were fighting it out long before the u.s. was a gleam in george washinton's eye and quite a while after washington has buttoned his britches. and they were fighting amongst themselves until the 1800s, long after most of their european neighbours had settled into themselves. italy being a relatively young country (canada = 1867, italy = 1861), it's kind of natural that it still has "growing pains", the different regions still not sure they WANT to be subsumed in the greater country. (though, really, it feels pretty damned weird speaking of italy as if it were a only a few years older than canada.)

[Anon Man]

Yes, aaalex, it isn't confined to Europe. I used Europe as a specific example. The U.S., of course, has regional food, but a lot of that is the immigrant history. Chicago has a lot of Poles and a lot of Polish food. Texas, not so much. And, I wouldn't say "all" countries. I don't think Luxemburg has much regional variance, for example. Ditto Tonga, etc...

Yes, "modern" Italy is new. The history of the country and the various components of it is really interesting. But, even before the founding of the modern state, there were alliances, some commonality of culture, and other similarities. But, it isn't like Europeans are really known for stability of their nations. If you want to play that way, modern France is only since the start of the Fifth Republic in 1958.

[nomnomnom]

Someone asked about the ratings. Last week was a 1.5 with 1.2 from 18-49 demo. Premiere was 1.7 which was down from S7 slightly.

I have no idea what ratings it takes to keep turning out these shows on a continuous cycle like they are. It still is dominating Wednesday in the target demo so who knows.

The fact that there isn't a Bravo Season 9 announced yet is somewhat troubling. I guess they are waiting to see how the Canada version goes.

[nomnomnom]

Just read that other site. Not sure what has everyone so offended, except for perhaps the language. It's not super controversial to suggest Carla's dish was the weakest of her team. It got the least praise on the telecast and some of the blog mentions weren't exactly glowing, but sometimes you get higher praise of the dishes that got little airtime to compensate for editing.

Swap her to the other team and put out her dish as their pastry instead of Marcel and little changes. It may have just sent Tiffany home instead as that Marcel dessert was universally disliked.

[KinderJ]

Anon Man- Spain is an especially interesting case, as federalism is arguably an even more powerful force on the Iberian peninsula than in the US. Some states are practically their own small countries and I think this really shows in the cooking. The cuisine of the Basque region is quite different from the food in Barcelona, despite being no so far apart in absolute geographical distance. Returning to the topic of Italy, pre-Garibaldi and his northern counterpart (Count Cosmo? Something like that? He was Piedmontese I believe.) you had the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies which ran roughly half way up the calf of the boot, and a network of northern states.

I would argue that those northern states strongly show the influence of French and German cooking. Consider the strong presence of butter, cream and heavy sauces of the north contrasted with the citrus, spices and oil present in the south. Sicily, with it's strong north African influences is an excellent case in point. There may be a cream or butter based sauce from Sicily, but I don't know it. I realize that not all heavy sauces, or cream or butter sauces, are necessarily of French or German origin. I do argue that there is not a huge leap from a Morney to an Alfredo.

[aaalexis]

anon man: actually, luxemburg - too small to have "much" regional variance - still has french vs. german issues. tonga? not sure, but if you're really going for small and homogeneous populations, how about Vatican City? or Niue? i'm willing to bet that, among the 1500 people living on Niue, there are a bunch of people who don't like the culture of a bunch of other people.

no, modern france doesn't date from the fifth republic and can't at all be compared to the situation of italy. you're stretching to make some point i'm struggling to understand because you seem to have a major chip on your shoulder about italy.

it's a country i like. i've visited it often. i admire its poetry, its painting, its people and its cuisine. is that good enough for you? or would you like to see a picture of me kissing la cicciolina's ass?

[KinderJ]

I like Italy. I have only briefly been to France, but I liked it too. One of the things I like about them is the regionality of the food and culture. I do think that there is a standardized 'French' cooking to an extent. True, the food is different in Marseilles and Normandy, but you do have the Mother Sauces, generally identical technique, Escoffier and so on. It's worth remembering that for quite a long time, Haute Cuisine was (and the clue is in the name) French cuisine, and of the type served to Parisian aristocrats and the wealthy generally. This was the food imported to America which defined fine dining for so long. Restaurants and wealthy individuals advertised their French, or French trained, chefs. The closest modern analog I can think of is a Sushi restaurant advertising an imported Japanese chef, usually on a short term basis. The enormous impact of formal French dining created a somewhat unified national cuisine, in a way I feel you don't see in Italian cooking.

This, of course, leads us back to the simple v. complicated debate. If the French cuisine we are discussing is the product of formal dining, the food of the elites, then it makes sense that the food would be heavily worked. The economics of high end dining are wildly different than the economics of peasant or even middle income food. Consider Beef Bourgeon: you braise with one batch of vegetables, extract their flavor, discard all of them, then on the second day prepare a second batch of elegantly turned vegetables to plate next to the beef. Delicious, beautiful, a joy to the pallate, but time consuming and expensive.

[matthew]

"I went to a boxing match and a hockey game broke out."

What's not to love about this back-and-forth about cuisine and the classification of technique(s) employed to make it?! This is EXACTLY why I love coming to Skillet Doux.

[KarenF]

Nom3, I think there is a TC9 (and a Just Desserts 2)... here's the casting announcement:
http://www.tvlatest.com/article/1947/Top+Chef+9+and+Top+Chef+Just+Desserts+2+casting

[Independent George]

The Tribune's food blog breaks the chefs down as follows:

Headed for the final, barring a disaster (3-1): Richard, Angelo
Each have two wins and have finished high. These are the guys whom the other chefs are watching (and deferring to) in the challenges.

Highly competitive and could still win (7-1): Antonia, Dale, Carla
Dale and Carla have two wins each and Antonia would have won last week had she not been on a team with the two who were cut. All of them are cooking with confidence and all are creative enough to win.

A puncher's chance of making the final, but won't win (20-1): Fabio, Mike, Tiffany
Mike Isabella has been the steadiest competitor so far, the person other chefs have leaned on in team challenges. Fabio is having a great season but could be one asian-inspired challenge away from the knife. Tiffany looked truly lost in "Restaurant Wars."

Dead chef walking (50-1): Tre
Tre has swung high and low, but without the benefit of racking up wins like he did in season three. He could have gone home twice already.

[KinderJ]

IG- I can go along with most of that, though with two caveats. First, Fabio got a top mention for his ribs in the Dim Sum challenge, and second, I don't remember Antonia having the best dish of RW. Maybe she did. Does someone have a quote? I feel somewhat skeptical. I know that these are not necessarily your rankings, but pretty interesting never the less.

KarenF- Thanks, I was getting nervous for a minute there.

Matthew- It is 13 degrees F. in Boston right now. We must fight, with glove, puck and food debate, lest the blood freeze in our veins. I honestly thought my eyeballs were freezing this morning. Not so good, really.

[Independent George]

KinderJ - Oh, those aren't my rankings at all. I make a point of not doing any rankings, because I am blessed with the unique ability to jinx anybody I take a shine to. This applies to sports, and the stock market, too; I have a solemn duty not to rank contestants for the integrity of the game. Great power/great responsibility yada yada yada.

[paula]

As I follow this culinary history discussion (really fascinating, though some of the non-culinary minutiae makes me feel like Ralph Wiggam: "My cat's breath smells like cat food"), I realize I wish I knew more about the regular posters on this site. It's a pretty interesting crew, and we don't even know each other's real names! (Except for Matthew and Dom. :) )

Just sayin'. I know most people like contributing to boards like this because of the anonymity.

Anyhoo.....

Did someone say there's no new episode this week?

[lou]

the funny thing about this whole debate over french v. italian cooking. If you read Bill Buford, he is now working on a book looking at whether Catherine de Medici brought Italian techniques to France and thus was the foundation of French cooking...He brought up the question in Heat, IIRC.

[Steve]

Marcel blames Isabella for his loss. So glad he is gone. His food was mediocre at best all season. I used to favor him over Ilan. But now...

This week...I'm betting either Tiffany or Tre goes home.

[KinderJ]

IOU- Foundation of French cooking? Oh man, do I hear the lid coming off a can of worms. A question more likely to have a definitive answer would be 'When did French cooking start to be defined and codified?' A mirepoix is so much onions to so much celery and carrots. A dice is such and such as opposed to a mince. There was a book, fairly ancient, which identified the 'Mother Sauces' from which all other sauces descended etc, until at last we wash up at the feet of Escoffier and Careme. But even they come at the end of the nineteenth and start of the twentieth century- the origins go back much further, I'm sure.

Paula- We do seem to be a pretty diverse crowd, don't we. For what it's worth, I am wrapping up my third year of law school, am married, and have a tendency to sit down in large book stores and read the cookbooks during my lunch breaks. Occasionally I consider buying a dog.

[bryanD]

"But, even before the founding of the modern state, there were alliances, some commonality of culture, and other similarities."---Anon Man

Well, I see that "my" thesis that the Italian cultures, north v south, spring out of two different mothers went over like a lead zeppelin. Yet that is what the regions themselves celebrate to this day (despite Tourism Board wishes). The hoary northern saying that "Africa begins south of Rome" has been embraced (Yankee Doodle Dandy 1775-style) by the southerners in their "half-black" arts and culture movement.

Again: the southern cultures of Italy are closer to Greece, Spain, Turkey, Portugal, and Morocco, than to verdant ancient northern states shaped by France and the Germanic Holy Roman Empire over 10 centuries. The southern states were in flux as late as the overthrow of the Papal States by the (Northern) Nationalists in 1861.

As already mentioned by someone above, the Kingdom of the Two Sicilies was just another transmogrification of the absentee-landlord policies that kept the South in flux. (This Kingdom was but a royal dowry prize trading hands, but interesting in that it memorializes the borders of the historical "province", Magna Grecia that I mentioned earlier as the Greek roots of the southern civilizations.

"If you read Bill Buford, he is now working on a book looking at whether Catherine de Medici brought Italian techniques to France and thus was the foundation of French cooking."----lou

Very interesting. The timeline sure seems right: her regency and the printing press. (Of course, the French would remind you that Catherine was half-French!)

[Independent George]

A question more likely to have a definitive answer would be 'When did French cooking start to be defined and codified?'

I believe Escoffier is typically credited for first codifying French cuisine in the late 19th century - at right around the same time Garibaldi was trying to establish a national identity in Italy.

[Independent George]

Actually, scratch that - I got my French chefs mixed up. It was Careme, not Escoffier.

[KinderJ]

I have not read either, but from what I remember hearing third hand Escoffier is credited more for the way he organized kitchens, the brigade system, etc. Recipes and instructions as well, certainly, but the big organizational development was in kitchen management. Careme specialized in high end cuisine. Anything you can add to this would almost certainly improve my shaky body of knowledge.

[Independent George]

You are right about Escoffier; his greatest contribution was modernizing kitchen management (coining the now-familiar terms, chef-de-cuisine, sous-chef, etc. originated in Escoffier's kitchens) at the Savoy and Ritz hotels.

Careme was the one to categorize the mother sauces, and tried to create a 'theory' of French cooking.

I, also, have never read either, and only know of this from second-hand sources. Hence, my tendency to conflate the two of them.

[bryanD]

Well, it's apt that celebrity chefs become in-focus on any skilletdoux thread, but these stars in the antique culinary firmamant were certainly not pioneers in anything. Lou's (above) mention of the Medici Court certainly demands a kitchen run along military lines with an excruciatingly low tolerance for failure (chef suicides are a familiar trope), and antedates Careme by a over a century. A quick google of the slightly-later court cuisine of Louis XIV (early-1600s) shows us that everything old is new again:

"LAST SERVICE
Edible candle"

[ally]

well, i have no idea what the origins of french, italian, spanish, indian, chinese, japanese, african, etc. foods are. however, if you think about it, the great equalizer is "street" or peasant foods, which of course is bourdain's mainstay for his show on the travel channel.

for these "simple" foods, there are excellent versions and then not-so-much. if you were to debate which of these are most complex, seems to me (avid home cook only) like dom hit it correctly with indian food, for example, which does have such a complex treatment of spices involved that it, for me, is the most difficult to replicate in the kitchen. although i also have limited success with just about any asian foods. "fancy" technique notwithstanding, what is more complicated than developing those flavors?

regardless, it seems to me that it takes an excellent cook to produce any area/country's food that seems surprising or unexpected, with well-developed flavors. and it seems to me that this season, dishes that "sing" in that way are what are receiving the praise, regardless of refinement or technique.

anyway, please continue with the history/culture thing. great reads all. :)

[HF]

"or would you like to see a picture of me kissing la cicciolina's ass?"

I'm sure it wasn't you, but I saw it in a movie. *rimshot*

[ri]

I'm going to take away from the actual food discussions to go back to the question of leadership that was brought up earlier. Now the point was made that in ideal circumstances, Marcel would be able to pick and train his own team and that he would have less interference. That's all fine and well, but that's not what leadership is about. Setting the bar lower means that the need for the requisite skills of leadership are diminished, but that does not mean that they are taken away. Just because he is able to pick people who would be initially intent on listening and following does not mean that he has the maturity and skill to lead others, as a chef must do.

I'm going to give two examples, since I wrote a much, much longer version yesterday only to have it get rejected (grrrrr).

First, let's look at the menu planning. Marcel initially wanted people to throw out concepts and then work from there. When people did not immediately bow to his authority and instead started announcing dish ideas, Marcel tried to put his foot down and stop the flow. Unfortunately, he missed an opportunity here. Rather than have the intended effect, he was further ignored and suffered a loss of face as he continued to meekly object. What he should have been doing was trying to cull from the announced dishes a common theme or a theme in general, and lead by example. The most effective way to influence people is not to tell them what to do, but to guide them to what you want. This is what Bourdain's blog was hinting at his sous - you can't make people respect you. You have to give them a reason to do so and for him to just tell people "listen to this guy or else" would do nothing.

Second, let's talk about how Marcel communicated during cooking. We all saw him ask Isabella to communicate more, which caused Isabella to snap, then reflexively snap at Angelo. What Marcel should have done initially was to ask the whole kitchen to talk more and to be louder. Instead, he singled Isabella out and in front of the whole kitchen used a snippy tone to ask him to speak louder. Sensing disrespect, Isabella's ego got the best of him and he acted out of line. When Angelo stepped in to calm things down, Marcel snapped as he perceived someone else was superseding his position. So instead of having one problem defused he created two problems. Compare this to Fabio's handling of Dale - he calmly asked Dale not to yell, soothed his ego, and protected the egos of his servers. If you want to talk about what leadership is about, you really should look at Fabio. Even if he may not be the best cook on the show, he showed the leadership you would expect from a chef.

[Steve]

I hate these breaks. Not even a holiday as an excuse to do a rerun.

My rankings:

1 Dale
2 Angelo
3 Richard
4 Carla
5 Antonia
6 Fabio
7 Mike
8 Tre
9 Tiffany

[Danny]

I love this discussion. Indian food is particularly fascinating to me. A few months ago BBCA aired a three part show of Ramsay in India. He went all over the vast country and unearthed some truly amazing culinary experiences (beef-eating former cannibals!). I am going to completely get this wrong as to the specifics but not the the point. Ramsay was making street food in a large city - let's say Mumbai. He was making a dish that if you asked people to name 5 Indian dishes it would make everyone's list. And yet the people in this very large city in India had never eaten anything like the dish. The cuisine is so much more complex and diverse than I had ever imagined. Needless to say the hunger for Indian food was front and center.

Palm Springs has the worst Asian food of anywhere I have lived (hard to deal with after 29 years in San Francisco) but strangely we have two really excellent Indian restaurants - strip mall, formica tables and fluorescent lighting - but oh the food is wonderful!

Now if we can only get decent Chinese, Japanese, Thai, Cambodian, Laotian....dream on. My friends will take me to a new Thai restaurant - "trust me, you'll like this one" - and after setting down and pushing the chopsticks (!) away I invariably see General Tso's chicken as the first dish. Sigh.

[aaalex]

ri: i'm sorry but i think you're missing the point entirely. TC is a game in which contestants vie with each other for a prize. the contestants sometimes work with each other. they sometimes sabotage each other. what they DON'T do is behave as chefs would in the real world. in the real world, if an EC did not know how the cooks in his kitchen were going to behave at any given moment, he or she would not be able to consistently accomplish the task at hand - producing his or her dishes with maximum quality and fidelity. that's why they choose - or try to choose - cooks they get along with, cooks who are sane, cooks who won't throw salt in the soup when they're peeved, or make a violent scene when they don't get what they want.

the element of competition changes the relationship among the chefs ENTIRELY. in the real world, if the chefs were all in competition, with sous actively seeking the failure of the EC, kitchens would run like something out of Mad Max:

EC: You question my decisions, i kill your parents after my pals have their way with them. you understand? now cut those fucking carrots like i asked you too.
Sous: Yy...yes, chef.
sous' mother: thank god!
sous' father: i know! i'm still sore from that last disagreement.

bourdain made judgments about a chef (marcel)'s actual personality and capabilities though he has never - as far as we know - seen marcel in a real world context. is marcel a good "chef"? maybe, maybe not. but we haven't the evidence of his performance in the real world to judge from. so, bourdain's points - all of which were good points - are beside the main point: TC is a competition - one during which the chefs are removed from family, friends, home, and the familiar - not the real world, so any judgment about how these people would perform in the real world is ridiculous or nasty or done to entertain.

if you were taken from your home, thrown in with strangers who want you to fail so they can succeed, forced to do things that are set up for your failure, sleep deprived ... how would you feel about judgments made about you based on your performance in this game? it's like calling eve aronoff a bad chef because she was something of a failure at TC. come on. really? eve aronoff is a james beard winning, successful EC. her performance on TC has absolutely NOTHING to do with her qualities as an EC. same with marcel. nor does success on TC mean success in the real world. last i looked, spike was doing better - more restaurants, greater renown - than ilan hall. ilan won his season, spike didn't. again: TC is a GAME. how the chefs perform on this GAME has little to do with how they are in the real world. that was and is the point.

we can theorize about how marcel might have played the game better. he might have toned down his personality. he might have kissed more ass to get closer to his opponents. but you can bet that if marcel had played the game more successfully, dale would NOT have chosen him to lead the other side.

as for fabio: the man has got the personality to play this game. he soothed his servers' feelings. he made his people feel part of a team. he should - in my opinion - have won. BUT he wasn't the "chef". his was not final authority. he was a middle man, an excellent one, one of the best in TC history. his role was NOT to lead. he did not have to worry about the whole picture. dale did. don't confuse the butter (fabio) with the knife (dale).

[Independent George]

I love this discussion because (1) I'm learning a LOT, and (2) I don't feel like a pretentious git. Ok, I feel like less of a pretentious git than usual.

[EdT.]

"...I don't remember Antonia having the best dish of RW. Maybe she did. Does someone have a quote?"

Not RW, but the fishing/seafood challenge prior. Tom Colicchio said Antonia's was his favorite dish, and she might have won had her team not been on the bottom (with Tiffani and Jamie both getting the PPYKAG.)

As far as Carla's dish in RW: at least one diner asked for the recipe. And got it. Which is pretty serious praise, IMHO.

~EdT.

[ri]

aaalex: I see your point to an extent, but you really are ignoring the fact that Marcel is a fairly poor leader in pretty much all of his actions on the show and giving an enormous amount of credit to what none of us know. Yes, this is a different dynamic than one would find in a kitchen. However, leadership is something you will have regardless of the circumstances. It's not something you get by having the title of "Executive Chef" in a proper restaurant with people who (should) want to listen to you. It's something you have by understanding how to deal with people, by keeping a level head, and by communicating effectively. Have you noticed these qualities, in any context, for anything Marcel has done on the show or in any of the press he has done?

The example you give of an EC yelling at a cook to cut his carrots like he wants is particularly telling, if for nothing that it is something that Marcel has shown himself to be entirely unwilling to do when it would have been entirely appropriate. If you truly believe that everyone is out for themselves, this kind of exactness would be mandatory for anyone given even the appearance of a leadership role, like, I don't know, executive chef of a team in restaurant wars. Second, while you may intimidate your peers with tough talk, it only works if they trust your vision. If that is your sole trick in the bag, you are going to have problems consistently. Even people who have tough reputations and who may be grating, like Bourdain as you noted, still chummed it up with their line cooks, helped them out professionally, and gave credit where it was due. Even those who subscribe to the old school French mentality of cruelty towards perfection recognize those who do well and trust others around them to improve their concepts and ideas.

Most of all though, you have to have a philosophy of leadership, regardless of where you are. If you want to be a passive leader, you have to be skilled at directing people to do what you want to do without forcing them to do it. If you want to be a direct leader, you need to be assured of your correctness and you need to be firm and direct in your communication. Marcel really showed none of those skills.

Given the absolute best circumstances in a professional kitchen, Marcel could succeed, sure. But given that a chef is a leader of cooks and this is a cooking show, he was heads and shoulders lower than many of his competitors. It's not a coincedence that Dale and Richard did so well. It's not a coincedence that in Season 6 Jenn was able to marshal all of the chefs to get their jobs done. It's a testament of their skills to do so, under, as you described, really poor conditions.

As for Fabio: I was careful not to describe his actions in Restaurant Wars as a chef. His leadership, however, is what you would want to see from a chef. You don't have to be a smooth talker, but you do want to keep things running smoothly. However, regardless of what his job description may have been, Fabio was most certainly a leader. He led the front of the house and acted to keep the kitchen calm. The thing about leadership is that it does not depend on what your job description may technically be, it's about the manner in which you perform your job. Whenever you are put in charge of a group of people and tasked with working as a go between with an entire different group, you will have to display some leadership. As an aside, from my viewing Fabio was giving consistent notes and advice based upon what was coming from the front of the house. To me that certainly qualifies as leadership - taking initiative and giving thought out and careful critiques that improved the cooking.

When it comes down to it, leadership is not something that is as thought out as cooking is. It is not a creative process. It is about snap decisions, good instinct and understanding, and careful management. Really, the only danger this show presents to leadership is the danger that people respect others too much to try to assert leadership when needed, which I hardly think was Marcel's problem. Rather, I really think it comes down to that he does not know how to speak with nuance and when others do not respect him from the beginning. He shuts down rather than communicates, which just intensifies problems. It's something that in a professional kitchen he will experience and has shown nothing in terms of ability to handle it effectively.

[bryanD]

We all knew very early in the episode that Marcel would have a Bad Challenge when he balked at the formality of writing the suggesting chef's name next to the dish that chef suggested putting on the menu.

I thought, Wow! Hung must tie this guy to the hot water heater at night.

[aaalex]

ri: that's a interesting response, but i still think it misses the point entirely. (i hope i'm not being obtuse, here.)

the consequences of TC being a game show aren't just visible in the behaviour of the contestants, though it's extremely important to remember that the contestants have been taken from their usual environments, forced into the company of people they may or may not like, sometimes sleep deprived, and inevitably driven to execute tasks that are designed to have them fail. TC, like most reality game shows, are what are known in engineering circles as "tests to destruction". you've created a thing (a airplane engine, say) and it's crucial for you to know under what circumstances the engine will fail. so, before the engine goes out, you do everything you can to MAKE the engine fail. that's a "test to destruction". here, you take a chef, you force the chef to execute tasks that drive the chef out of his/her comfort zone, and you do this repeatedly until only one chef is left. there are NO real life equivalents to this. yes, there are certainly situations that will drive a chef from the profession. and there are certainly crises that can destroy a chef's career. but TC is a game, an artificial crisis, one the chef's are encouraged to take as a game. EVERY SINGLE THING you see on TC is part of a game. PERIOD. that's in and of itself important to remember, but there's something else ...

TC is made for television. it is a program that is edited to within an inch of its life. what you see, when you watch an episode of TC, is what the editors WANT you to see. the idea that the chefs reveal their "real" selves, here, is laughable. "real selves" are complex. on TC chef "a" is made into a villain or a hero, passive or agressive, amusing or serious. something of their natural personalities are heightened. their words are ripped from context. the questions that elicited their words are missing. when tre called marcel about the program in which tre was shown to have said "marcel is an asshole", tre told marcel that TC had cut out the second part of tre's sentence: "all of us are assholes". TC MISREPRESENTED tre, because this is not real life, it's a game show. what you saw of jen in season six is what the producers wanted you to see: a brief moment - during the airforce gig - when jen got hector to stop yacking and get down to business. they made her (or allowed her to) look badass. what you saw of jen in season eight was someone who may have believed her press and who showed seriously questionable "chef" skills. neither portrait is "real". both are created. you don't know ANYTHING about jen's abilities in a kitchen from watching season 6 or season 8 of TC. what you saw is her personality as she plays this game. it's as simple as that. why else do you suppose that the contestants INVARIABLY complain about their portrayals or mention that their portrayals are not completely accurate? it's not just because they're sore losers. it's because TC is edited to tell a story, the "real" personalities of these contestants be damned.

so, you've got people taken from their "real" lives and working environments and you've got a production company that absolutely MUST create drama or their show will fail and they'll all be out of jobs. (the number of editors on this show is phenomenal, and their work - along with the producers - is really, really good.) that's two situations that ought to make you pause and say "hmmm ..." before you give an opinion on what kind of "chef" marcel vigneron actually is.

your points just don't take any of this into account. you write

"The example you give of an EC yelling at a cook to cut his carrots like he wants is particularly telling, if for nothing that it is something that Marcel has shown himself to be entirely unwilling to do when it would have been entirely appropriate."

no, it would not have been appropriate.
when an EC is working in his or her restaurant, he/she has genuine POWER. that is, he or she has control over the professional fate of a sous chef or a line cook. firing, giving bad references, making a person's life utterly miserable until that person leaves: that is POWER. plain and simple. on TC marcel has absolutely NO POWER. (do you suppose, even for instant, that mike isabella would have dared speak to jose andres the way he spoke to marcel?) on TC - a game, remember - all the contestants are equal. so, every "EC" - yes, even during RW - must negotiate his or her power and if one of the chefs "under" him or her refuses to do what he or she is told, there are absolutely NO CONSEQUENCES to the rebellious chef. it has been said time and time again by the judges: "we don't know or care what goes on in the kitchen. we only judge the food." in other words, mike isabella can tell marcel to "fuck off" and there's not a damned thing marcel can do. do you really think this lack of power is inconsequential? it isn't. it's part of what makes the GAME interesting. what has to happen is gamesmanship and negotiation. marcel did not play the game well. he did not manage to bring others to his side. so, when he was given (nominal) control of a group during RW, he really had no grounds on which to make anyone do anything: no one, except angelo, cared what happened to marcel or appeared to give a fuck about marcel's wishes. no one seemed to LIKE marcel. at least not that we could see. (tiffany complained about his telling her to make eggs a different way and then failed when she made them her way.) so, when marvel complained that you can't force people to do what you ask of them, he was referring to within the context of a game when all the others are your equals. of course, you can force people to do things in YOUR kitchen. bourdain's friend was not able to get the respect of bourdain's workers? well, uhm, no shit sherlock, it wasn't his kitchen it was bourdain's. they knew who daddy was and, like children everywhere, responded to daddy first and then DECIDED how they wanted to respond to the hapless uncle who'd been given "control" of the kids for a while. are some uncles better than others at getting kids who aren't theirs to do their bidding? sure. certainly. but the ones who aren't able to get others' children to do what they like aren't necessarily bad fathers themselves.

again, your comments totally ignore the reality of the GAME you're watching. when you write

"Even people who have tough reputations and who may be grating, like Bourdain as you noted, still chummed it up with their line cooks, helped them out professionally, and gave credit where it was due."

you're forgetting that the only "prize" on TC is victory. if you do what marcel asks during RW, what do you get? that's the question each contestant has to answer for him/herself. angelo and antonia wanted the kitchen to work as a kitchen might in the real world because that's what they know. (and they were both professional, despite what you persist in calling marcel's failure as a "chef". you get the irony, right? for the ones who had decided to behave professionally. it didn't matter if marcel was properly in control or not.) isabella let his peeve out, because the consequence (failure) were less weighty to him than playing the game as he saw fit. and he wasn't exactly wrong. he cooked a good dish and he somewhat sabotaged marcel's position. again, i guarantee - i'd bet my house, here - isabella wouldn't even dream of treating jose andres that way. not just because he respects jose andres but because jose andres was one of his teachers. something marcel, as his competitor, couldn't be. though, if marcel had been good at playing the TC game, he might have taught isabella gamesmanship. as we know, marcel wasn't that good at TC.

you write:

"I see your point to an extent, but you really are ignoring the fact that Marcel is a fairly poor leader in pretty much all of his actions on the show and giving an enormous amount of credit to what none of us know."

not to be condescending, but think about that. "giving an enormous amount of credit to what none of us know"? TC is a game that lasts some 12 hours (12 episodes). we get, MAYBE, 5 minutes per chef per show. if you watch an entire series and IF a contestant lasts an ENTIRE series, you'll have spent approximately an hour (an extremely edited and manipulated hour) with that contestant. are you suggesting it is anything less than insanity to base your judgment of a person on one hour's exposure to him or her? marcel vigneron is 30 years old. yes, boy howdy i'm giving "an enormous amount of credit to what none of us know". yes, i really fucking DO assume that the (30 yrs x 365 days x 24 hrs = 262, 800 - 2 hrs =) 262,798 hrs none of know are enormously important in deciding what kind of "chef" marcel actually is. you and bourdain are allowing the extremely edited time you've spent with marcel to be the basis of a judgment of his talent and potential as a "chef". to me, that's confusing fantasy and reality. bourdain has an excuse: his blog is meant to be entertaining gas. AND IT IS. but it's still just gas. he has no idea what kind of "chef" marcel actually is, if he's basing his judgment on marcel's performance on TC. and, of course, neither do you. (and neither do i. i'm not saying either of you is wrong. i'm saying you couldn't possibly know.)

you write

"Given the absolute best circumstances in a professional kitchen, Marcel could succeed, sure. But given that a chef is a leader of cooks and this is a cooking show, he was heads and shoulders lower than many of his competitors. It's not a coincedence that Dale and Richard did so well."

this is wrong-headed, too. marcel wouldn't need "the absolute best circumstances" to succeed. he'd need the NORMAL circumstances. people listening to hi and wanting to execute his vision. but the real telling thing is your assessment of dale. dale was kicked off season 4 for his performance during restaurant wars. dale, during TC masters, exploded at chiarelli asking him "what he was going to do about it". (chiarelli had no power over dale, so ...) dale has anger management issues. dale managed to lose it with his servers during this season's RW. where, in all that, do you see proof that dale is a better "chef" than marcel? (all he seems to have is scream/swear/pout. though, here again, i don't have sufficient date to know what he's like in the real world.) i'm guessing you simply prefer the others to marcel rather than making anything like an objective assessment of their gamesmanship. (i won't even mention richard's nagging of fabio ... but remember ... it took the combined talents of richard and dale to lead this group to victory.)

re fabio: yes, you were careful not to describe fabio as chef. but you forgot to take into account that his "leadership" was not leadership per se. or not of the group, anyway. he did not have to think about cooking or making sure things in the kitchen went well or getting his group to perform. he certainly controlled and handled the servers well. (again, i don't think we'll EVER see a better front-of-house playing this game) in other words, the pressure on him called for different skills than those needed to be an EC on this show. (i'm not certain the other chefs would have respected him enough as a cook to take his wishes seriously.) if fabio had been EC, do you really think the group would have done as well? i have my doubts and i don't think being excellent at FOH means being a good EC. different kinds of authority/personality needed. they're not really comparable.

finally, you say ...

"When it comes down to it, leadership is not something that is as thought out as cooking is. It is not a creative process. It is about snap decisions, good instinct and understanding, and careful management. Really, the only danger this show presents to leadership is the danger that people respect others too much to try to assert leadership when needed, which I hardly think was Marcel's problem. Rather, I really think it comes down to that he does not know how to speak with nuance and when others do not respect him from the beginning. He shuts down rather than communicates, which just intensifies problems. It's something that in a professional kitchen he will experience and has shown nothing in terms of ability to handle it effectively. "

here, too, i think you just don't take into account WHAT you were shown, WHO was showing it to you, or the context in which you saw what you did. more: you seem to think "leadership" is the same whatever the circumstance. so, you assume that fabio being good with his servers would make a good "chef", you assume that a performance on a game show is revealing of what would happen in real life, you assume that "leadership" isn't dependent on who exactly one is leading, you assume that a single "leadership philosophy" covers all bases. i, personally, think you couldn't be more wrong. there are any number of tip top management types who are lousy authorities at home. there are excellent captains on a football field who couldn't direct traffic. and, to my mind, there are great game players who would make lousy real-life leaders and vice-versa. so, i persist in thinking that what you saw of marcel on TC isn't anything like enough to judge what he'd be like in real life.

[Skillet Doux]

"what you saw of jen in season six is what the producers wanted you to see: a brief moment - during the airforce gig - when jen got hector to stop yacking and get down to business. they made her (or allowed her to) look badass."

Not to refute the point (with which I agree), but I feel compelled to mention I have it on good authority that Jen is a badass :-)

[aaalex]

domenic: oh, man ...

a. you just gotta say whose authority that is.
b. if dale reads that last post, he's gonna feel awfully warm
c. angelo, too ... with the warmth, i mean
d. now i think of it, it IS getting a little warm in here

[foodiewannabe]

Nobody on Marcel's team wanted to be eliminated regardless of their negative feelings about Marcel. They went their own way, albeit unsuccessfully, because they had no trust in his judgement. Team Bodega took a clever concept, initiated by Richard, and took it to a clever, successful conclusion; they knew what a bodega was, and how you can take the fare and elevate it without being unduly pretentious(would have scarfed up every one of their dishes). Fabio, being a restauteur with a heavy overlay of charm, knew exactly what to do to please the diners and keep the food coming and gave necessary intel to the kitchen while allowing them to do their jobs.
Came to Top Chef in Season 5 but have seem 1-4 in reruns and Team Bodega seems to have been at least one of the top performers in Restaurant Wars.
As far as the psyches of the contestant; dont care. Cook well and provide some fun moments; a little drama okay.

[dc]

So I felt like doing my current ranking...

[top tier -- consistently middle or better. multiple top group mentions]
1 Angelo
2 Richard
3 Dale
[middle tier -- solid mixed results, and editing]
4 Carla
5 Mike
6 Tre
7 Antonia
8 Fabio
[just hanging on]
9 Tiffany

No one is bad. Nobody is left I want to see go home. But Tiffany seems to be the weakest at the moment... on a small slump, which is deadly in a deep field as this. Everyone else left is pretty on their game.

[infinity728]

No Top Chef tonight? Pain beyond pains! I'll have to console myself with Fabio's fabulous blog post on the evils of cilantro (http://fabioviviani.com/blog/why-do-you-hate-cilantro/). Anyone else hate this pernicious herb?

My rankings:

1 Angelo
2 Richard
3 Carla
4 Fabio
5 Dale
6 Antonia
7 Mike
8 Tiffany
9 Tre

[aaalex]

dc: why tre above antonia?
infinity728: why dale below fabio?

(on an obscure and entirely unnecessary note: am i right that this is the first time in about two years that there's been a mid-season post-mortem with over (or likely to be over) 200 comments? seems like a long time ...)

[Independent George]

I hate cilantro. I think I read somewhere that it's a genetic thing - that it actually tastes different to different people.

[vizoroo]

The Elves seem to be extending this season with an unexplained break. I understood Christmas, but why now?

Not sorry to see Marcel go, he was really annoying. His edited personality got in the way of everything he prepared. He played the foam card at least 3 times too many.

Richard, Dale, Angelo(much to my dismay) seem to be on top. Carla and Antonia certainly could be spoilers, but the rest of the crowd are just that. Sorry Fabio, you showed what FOH should be, but not sure you can survive.

[gdiss]

IG:

You're right - it is genetic. My dad and I love it. Both my sister and mom think it tastes like soap.

[dc]

aaalex:
For middle tier cheftestants, it's pretty much a tossup. So "what have you done lately (meaning most recent ep), becomes much more pronounced in shuffling the cards.

I think I put tre a bit higher because he seems quietly confident groove, even if he's not wowing the judges, I don't remember him obviously misstepping yet, and I liked the pork dish he made and some of the positve diner comments about it during RW.

Anotonia a bit lower, because of a bit low confidence in the edit, with the judges knocking her on her gnocci. Fabio, close bottom of MoP, he's a restaurateur/FoH first, and a fine one at that, and a chef second.

[infinity728]

aaalex: Call it a feeling? Perhaps because of Dale allowing his new-unflappable exterior to be shaken at the beginning of Restaurant Wars? Perhaps because I feel a variety of the challenges have been in his sweet spot?

The previews for the upcoming challenge did influence my placement. An Italian challenge seems to make Isabella nervous; no word on Fabio, but I'll bet he embraces it with confidence and charisma that delivers on the plate. And, although you don't have to make pasta to make Italian, obviously, I can't help but remember another attempt at noodles Dale's made this season. I think he could be on the bottom of this one.

Of course, perhaps I'm putting too much personal feeling into the middle of the rankings. As a diehard Cleveland Indians fan who predicts 90+ wins for her team every year, despite all evidence to the contrary, that's certainly possible too. ;-)

[Skillet Doux]

"I can't help but remember another attempt at noodles Dale's made this season."

In all fairness to Dale, he tried to make those noodles in eight and a half minutes. A dumb decision, to be sure. But I doubt it's in any way indicative of his true noodlemaking ability.

[aaalex]

domenic: i just read your thoughts on marcel's exit meaning "no drama" for the rest of the way. man, what was in that food you ate at cork?

dale seems like he's ready to blow from moment to moment.
richard, despite his bromance with fabio, inevitably has the look of a long-tailed cat in a room full of rocking chairs. he, too, looks like he could lose it.
tiffany has been so sour this year, it's like she's a different woman.
and there seems to be developing tension between everyone else and angelo whenever angelo gets too close to their dishes.
that's not even mentioning isabella.

i'm betting a few more major blow ups before this season is done.

infinity728: i have to respect the opinion of anyone who starts the season thinking 90+ for the indians. as a blue jays fan, i know exactly how you feel. i'm agreeing with your rankings on principle.

dc: antonia's gnocchi were praised, actually. it was the braised oxtail that had over-reduced that got points taken off her dish. also, i can't think of anything tre's done since his win that screams "contender". it'll be interesting to see how he plays out. i think it's clear the reputation he had in season three as the most talented chef to be tossed at RW has taken a bit of a hit. i'm wondering if he can come back.

finally: i love cilantro! are you kidding? if there were such a thing as cilantro meringue pie, i'd eat it!

[bryanD]

"I hate cilantro. I think I read somewhere that it's a genetic thing - that it actually tastes different to different people."---Independent George

If the long-running anti-cilantro internet meme has come ashore at Skilletdoux then it must be real after all.

(I had assumed it was a false flag op by the shirts behind Tacos Bell, Tico, and Mayo.)

Mark me down as Pro.

[paula]

Cilantro: Yum. Also, if you don't read Television Without Pity's episode recaps, I find them pretty entertaining (esp. during an off week). The suggestion to rename Medi "Globi" is my favorite:

http://www.televisionwithoutpity.com/show/top_chef/restaurant_wars_one_night_only_1.php

[KinderJ]

Put me down as pro-cilantro, but you raise an interesting issue: some people can taste things that other people cannot. Anyone here see the No Reservations episode where Bourdain went to El Buli? They were experimenting with a chemical flavorant in the lab, a chemical which one in four people simply could not taste.

I have... no idea if flavorant is a word. I feel like it should be, but spell checker is calling me out on this one. Google's got my back though...

Moving along! Genetically linked detection of certain chemicals in food, which our brains interpret as flavor. Some scientists have argued that our ability to detect flavor (wildly generalizing here) is a survival trait, helping to identify poison or inedible food. It would also help identify healthy or calorie dense food. So what is it in cilantro that makes people think of soap? What drives Fabio to want to blow up a whole field of it? Any readers who took Org. Chem?

[nomnomnom]

Cilantro has a few aldehydes in it that cause the issue. Aldehydes are used in soaps frequently and many can not distinguish between aldehydes well. Thus some less-discerning pallets associate cilantro with soap. (sometimes you see people attributing tasting soap in cilantro with being a "supertaster", but there is scant data on this)

Most are fine eating chopped cilantro. The oily membrane of the leaf becomes more soluble this way and the concentration diminishes. And over time eating the less offensive chopped cilantro can make even raw cilantro palatable.

[aaalex]

kinderj: i saw the "no reservations" at el bulli. a really good show that, maybe because i saw them around the same time, reminded me of the "no reservations" at the french laundry. it has something to do with bourdain's sheer delight at both places. (he went to french laundry with ripert and someone else ... who was it?) bourdain can't help himself, at el bulli, when he comes up against things he himself - with his admitted mistrust of so-called MG - could not have come up with. (his sheer respect and delight is a form of humility, i think. it's his capacity to be astonished that makes me love anthony bourdain. the reverse side of that is that he doesn't suffer the mediocre very easily and can be quite cruel to those he thinks of as mediocre ... like rachel ray. but still, his obviously unfaked love for certain things makes up for his prickles, as far as i'm concerned.)

the sequence in the el bulli "lab", though, was just genius. weird genius, but genius still. i mean, weren't they in the midst of experiments to see how the extract from pomegranate seeds could be used?

btw: food for one-in-four is a peculiar concept, isn't it? i mean, what would a restaurant that caters to supertasters be like, exactly? what would be on the menu: everything or very little? what do heightened taste buds prefer? bland or complexly season? if there are any supertasters out there, i'm kind of curious to know ...

[jh]

A few articles to add to the cilantro/tasting discussion. There are genetic components that affect how we taste and experience food. Scientists conjecture that some aversions to food are for survival reasons. For example, bitter is an acquired taste, but is often the predominant flavor of many poisons. However, this may not be true, as supertasters can't stand foods such as broccoli and kale. Supertasters and cilantro-haters are not necessarily linked.

A cute NPR article about the cilantro divide:
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=98695984

The wiki article about supertasters and why it may be a legitimate excuse to hate broccoli:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Supertaster

An interesting side note, only some people report having a distinct smell in their urine after they consume asparagus. Apparently, there are two reasons. One, some people lack the protein responsible for the smelly urine, i.e. no smelly urine. Two, others lack a receptor to SENSE the smelly urine, i.e. they have smelly urine but can't smell it. An even smaller subset lack both.

[KinderJ]

Never could get into broccoli. Always wondered if it was a lingering distaste from childhood. Something about it that has always been very off putting for me. Mind you, I'm the same way with bell peppers. Cannot eat 'em. Cannot eat things with bell pepers in them. Chillies, Jalapenos, even stuff with habanero in it is no problem, but bell peppers just really put me off. Odd but true.

[Bawdy George]

nomx3:
pallet - platform for stacking and transporting goods
palate - roof of the mouth

I normally wouldn't say anything and am not trying to be a jerk, but this *is* a food blog :)

[bfish]

Count me in as loving cilantro. Poor Fabio! The first time I had a big dose of the herb was a very potent cilantro chutney in an Indian restaurant. That actually triggered a craving for cilantro that has never abated. My husband feels the same way about it.

I ate at a Mexican restaurant today that ordinarily serves a very good table salsa. It was yucky; it just tasted like tomatoes. Now I realize the critical difference was no cilantro (and I think onions were omitted as well -- boo). Maybe they've become too Gringo-ized.

[Vega]

I HATE HATE HATE HATE HATE cilantro. It's the one thing I just cannot eat, or even smell. The smell makes me nauseous. It doesn't smell particularly soapy to me - just *bad*. Fabio's blog post pretty much could be me writing it, because we apparently both share a deep loathing for it.

[KinderJ]

In honor of tonight's no Top Chef, and our previous discussion of simple/complicated and French/Italian comparative studies, I am reading recipes for cassoulet and bollito misto in the River Cottage Meat cookbook. Neither are complicated, both seem... ambitious.

[Steve]

Marcel got his own cooking show on the SciFi channel. Ugh!

[bryanD]

"I have... no idea if flavorant is a word. I feel like it should be..."---Kinder J

Carry on! I am sure that coiner, the 17th Earl of Oxford (alias Shakespeare), would agree. Ditto Mencken, Francis Bacon, and V. Nabokov.

"Mind you, I'm the same way with bell peppers. Cannot eat 'em. Cannot eat things with bell pepers in them."---Kinder J

I hereby cast thee into hellfire!!!...Just kidding.

Myself? I find that bell peppers and onions, grilled, then covered and steamed, then put on a plate or in a bowl, and eaten by moi...to be the ONLY (95%) ACCEPTABLE substitute for a meat diet. Add in mushrooms, and we're talking 97%.

"Maybe they've become too Gringo-ized."---bfish

I have noticed the trend of my local Mexican-Mexican drive-ups to gradually tweak their taco vapors away from the classic tortilla/meat/cilantro recipe in favor of the more Tex-Mex totilla/meat/onion style.

While I grew up loving Tex-Mex at home, I expect Mex-Mex where no one speaks English!

[KinderJ]

Steve- Marcel's Quantum Kitchen, or something like that, right? Actually I could see that not being completely terrible. Not sure I would watch it regularly, but I would at least check it out. Marcel seems to have trouble dealing with people, but he definitely knows his food science. It could be pretty informative.

[paula]

KinderJ: I'll join you in BryanD's hellfire, because bell peppers--green ones, especially--pollute everything they touch. I'm a reformed picky eater who now likes most everything, but green peppers are still firmly on the "avoid at all costs" list.

[Independent George]

I don't know what drugs you people are on; cilantro is vile and bell peppers are wonderful!

Who else here likes Brussels Sprouts? I never had them until my late twenties, and now I can't get enough. Seared, steamed, pickled, sauteed with mushrooms & shallots, stir-fried... I just don't know what everyone's complaining about.

[paula]

Brussels sprouts caramelized in butter and olive oil, tossed with parmesan cheese and a touch of truffle oil, are my idea of nirvana.

[paula]

...oh, and GARLIC!

[aaalex]

ig/paula: okay ... i was going along with the anti-cilantro thing because, you know, de gustibus non est disputandem, there's no arguing about taste. (thank you, latin courses)

but brussel sprouts are an abomination sent directly from hell to torment the children of earth. i can only understand a love for brussel sprouts as a kind of insanity during which your taste buds are clouded. free of said insanity, you're bound to see/taste the truth: they're a despicable vegetable and ought to be shunned, with or without caramelization.

[Independent George]

Flavorant is a perfectly cromulent word.

[jh]

I think there was a thread about brussel sprouts some time ago. I'm similar to IG, where I never had them as a child, and tried them in my mid-twenties, and love them.

For me, the one vile food is celery. I can take, but not thoroughly enjoy, the stir fry version of the young celery shoot, but that's about bit. The taste and smell is just so off-putting.

[aaalex]

jh: but celery is so essential as a base.
you can't have a mirepoix (or sofritto) without celery.
do you feel the same about cooked celery or just the raw.
(i'm with you if it's about raw celery, btw. i can't stand it. worse yet: my sisters used to eat celery sticks with cheez whiz ... i gag at the very thought...)

[KinderJ]

Eh, I don't hate celery, but I do tend to use less when preparing a mirepoix I often omit it, in fact. I never thought it added much, and the taste never really appealed.

[Danny]

Just read on the Bravo site that Curtis Stone has replaced Kelly Choi as the host of TC Masters. Best news is that there will be a new TC Masters!

[aaalex]

kinderj: but if you leave out the celery, all you've got is carrots and onions, not a mirepoix.

the proportions of a mirepoix are 2:1:1 onions: carrots: celery. while learning how to cook trinidadian food from my mother, i was surprised to learn how much the celery/carrots/onion thing is important in trini food as well (of course, there are other strong herbs used with the base: shadow benny, two kinds of thyme, scotch bonnets ...)

[paula]

I don't like celery either, and while I'll use it in a mirepoix, I leave it out of everything else. However, I just cooked with celery root for the first time and found it delightful. Great texture and just a hint of that celery flavor.

For what it's worth, I didn't have Brussels sprouts until my 30s. Makes me wonder about poor aaalex's childhood...

[aaalex]

paula: my childhood was idyllic until the introduction of brussel sprouts. i can't remember much, but i vaguely recall unicorns, angels and cotton candy until the fateful day some monstrous relative - my mom denies it was her - let the sprouts loose on my innocent plate. with that, green evil entered the world.

i've been haunted by that moment ever since.
my waking life is one long, failed effort to find the paradise that preceded sprouts.

[TxGriff]

Love cilantro and bell peppers. No problem with brussell sprouts or celery. Not a fan of asparagus. I tolerate it, but try to avoid it at all costs.

Oh, and cantaloupe. Thanks, but no thanks.

[aaalex]

txgriff: with cantaloupe is it the flavour or the texture?
i love the taste of bananas, but i gag when i try to eat them.

[aaalex]

thinking about raw celery ... i remember some of the kids in my grade school eating raw celery with peanut butter. that's a thought that still makes me go "yech". but the, when i told someone i used to love eating peanut butter and ketchup sandwiches, they were horrified.

i wouldn't eat the things now.
there IS something about your palate when you're young that is just ... unpredictable.

what's the worst combination any of you have eaten?

[TxGriff]

aaalex- the flavor, actually. It's mild, but something about it is just off putting to me.

About your other question, I used to love dipping bananas in my marina sauce when I was a kid. For all I know, I would still like the combo!

[TxGriff]

Oops, sorry, actually I misread your quesiton. I thought you were asking about weirdest,not worst. I really can't think of the worst...especially because now all I can think about is peanut butter and ketchup sandwiches. That just doesn't sound right.

[KinderJ]

My wife makes these odd peanut butter, olives and ham sandwiches, usually with chili flakes. I was initially revolted by the concept, but it becomes weirdly moreish as you actually eat it.

Worst thing I ever ate? Or worst combination? Hard to say. The food in Prague was so consistently awful that I just cooked for my self almost every meal. Even the hot dogs had huge uncooked chunks of fat and gristle in them. Hard to pick one thing as 'worst.'

[jh]

Raw celery I can't stand, but even cooked I don't like it. I tolerate it in soups, egg rolls, etc., but prefer most anything without them.

Can't think of a worst combo, but a weird one that I love to eat is yogurt and chips. Any flavor of yogurt fine (I prefer lemon, vanilla, or cherry) with any kind of chips (like Doritos, Lays, and Sun Chips) of any flavor (regular, sour cream, bbq, etc.). There's something about the sweet, salty, crunchy, creamy combo that I like. Don't knock it until you try it.

[Amanda P.]

Worst - liversausage (liverwurst) and cheese, microwaved. Still turns my stomach these days, but I remember actually eating it.

Picky eater here, so no to pretty much any pepper (including cracked black pepper as seasoning), mushrooms, asparagus, brussel sprouts, celery, cauliflower, any melon, banana, and most anything else interesting that people eat.

My husband says I have no taste. I ask you, what does that say about him?

[bryanD]

"Just read on the Bravo site that Curtis Stone has replaced Kelly Choi as the host of TC Masters."---Danny

That's the guy that picks up strange women in the supermarket and makes them fondue! Wonderful.

"Best news is that there will be a new TC Masters!"---Danny

That's a pretty good show. I wish they would hire Jeffrey Steingarten as a judge and replace Jay Rayner. I also hope the same ol' chefs don't show up to Try Again. Except for Chiarello of Napa. He was genuinely impressive.

"Oh, and cantaloupe. Thanks, but no thanks."---txgriff

Cantaloupe is the cockroach of raw foods. If you have them, you will know it. In cantaloupe's case, because its odor permeates the refrigerator and spoils my tea, unleashing Inner Hulk. The empirical fact that these hateful malodorous spaceballs are always brought into the house by the Fair Sex for their delectation and pleasure makes the quest for cantaloupe-free living a close-run thing.

Also, I WILL starve to death if locked in a Mister Pretzel factory. This has been lab-tested from my younger, flat-broke-between-paycheck days. Straight mayonnaise: ate it. Old fortune "cookie": ate it. Mustard, Worchestershire sauce, Wishbone Italian: drank it all. And then all that remained in my sad apartment was a mini Mister Pretzel box of unknown provenance: I was hungry. I tried the micro-nibble technique to perhaps bring the flour flavor to the forefront, but that noxious pretzel lacquer defeated me.

[infinity728]

bryanD: Although I, personally, could live an entire summer eating nothing but fresh cantaloupe and panzanella, your cleverly wordsmithed rant made me laugh, and that, I appreciate.

The worst thing I ever ate? I have a try-anything-at-least-once-a-year policy (after all, how do you know that your tastes haven't changed if you don't keep checking?), but I think tripe in hot pot might be the exception to that rule. Possibly tripe in general. I can't get over the umpteen tiny hairs tickling my tongue and throat *shudder* and boiling it in mind-numbingly hot peppered oil then dipping it in thick, cold sesame oil didn't really help. At all.

I think entrails are an acquired taste. Intestines have a lovely texture in a hot pot. Thoughts?

[Polybus]

Worst dining experience. A college roommate once cooked a can of baked beans with Vienna sausage flavored with catsup. Blech!

Don't mind any of the veggies.

Over 200 posts? Did anyone miss the show this week?

Glad to see that the board has some historians and that when you break food evolution down to the nubs nothing really means anything.

And... I'm with aalex on the game versus reality thing.

[Nsam]

"I have a try-anything-at-least-once-a-year policy (after all, how do you know that your tastes haven't changed if you don't keep checking?)" -- I'm absolutely in agreement. And so many wonderful foods are acquired tastes. That's why, at the risk of sounding obnoxiously judgmental, I have little patience for excessively picky eaters. But I guess I shouldn't bother being judgmental, because people who are like that are only cheating themselves. (Well, except when they're invited to dinner parties and behave like hideously spoiled children about what they will and will not eat.)

Worst combinations? I know eggs in the morning with ketchup is fairly common, but it's always seemed very odd to me, personally. Do any adults actually eat their eggs this way or is it only children who don't know any better? I'd ask the same question about an even more disgusting combo, ranch dressing as a dipping sauce for pizza. I believe this trend began in California but by now is pretty commonplace, esp. among the younger set. I'm sorry, I'm not even going to try to be openminded about that one, that's just revolting. The only possible excuse is if the pizza is so bad that it needs a severe flavor boost. (But if I called for a pizza and it was that hopelessly awful, I wouldn't try to salvage it with ranch dressing, I'd throw it out and make a sandwich or something.)

Oh, and a friend of mine when she was a young cook fell completely in love with cilantro and used to put it in EVERYTHING. I mean, I don't hate cilantro, but she was even putting it in the red sauce for the spaghetti. That's just wrong. Fabio, I think, if presented with such a pasta dish might inflict bodily harm on the cook.

[Nsam]

I have no idea who Curtis Stone is but I think he's got to be an improvement over that dullard mannequin Kelly Choi, so thumbs up for that one.

I am relieved that TC Just Desserts is getting another chance. The first go-round was a trainwreck but I think that was mostly due to bad luck with how the casting choices turned out, so yay for a better and bigger 2nd try.

[ally]

So much of food preferences is context...bell peppers make me burp (pardon me) so I try to avoid them. By the way, anyone else notice that the supposedly orange and red bell peppers found in grocery stores are now green ones that have been chemically induced to change color? I know this because of the burp factor. It's the same reason tomatoes now have no flavor (grocery store ones), I believe they pass a gas over them (pardon me again) that induces a color change.

My sister hated peas because her best friend hated them (age 8 or so). She has hated them determinedly ever since (she liked them before meeting said friend, and vociferously denies any historical pea love.)

My mom hates orange soda because one of the few times she ever got drunk, in college, was vodka and orange soda. By the way, in the 80's everyone I knew had an aversion to tequila because it was served in cheap form and vast quantities at parties. Everyone got sick. I imagine everyone in the 90's had a similar experience with Jagermeister. :)

I don't really like bananas (although sometimes i have a hankering for one, probably if I'm potassium deficient) because one Christmas when I was about 4 we had a bunch (pardon the pun) of them and I got sick. Also, I fear all organ meat (although I love sweetbreads and haggis) because of early liver and onions experiences. No child should be subjected to liver and onions!

Cilantro? Love it. I'm still not sure about lemon grass. First time I had it, I didn't like the dish. But now a dish purporting to contain lemon grass passes the taste test with flying colors. Maybe it took some getting used to.

[bfish]

The food preferences posts are very entertaining. The only things I actively avoid are pears, watermelon, (and I can eat them to be polite) and excessive mayo (it's okay in moderation and in salads, sauces, etc.). Oh, I should admit I really hate Miracle Whip though.

Brussel sprouts are something my family only had a few times as I was growing up; they weren't one of my mother's favorites. I liked them fine and still do, but my younger brother, who was a picky eater in general, hated them with a burning passion. When he went to the Naval Academy they were served one night in the mess hall. Although the rule was they had to take some of everything served at their table family-style, it became clear to the upperclassmen in his company that he was averse as he took only a few sprouts and picked at them. Because he was only a plebe they tormented him by making him finish all left in the serving bowl. I doubt he's gone anywhere near brussel sprouts since then.

[KinderJ]

I love lemon grass. I love just rolling it between my fingers and smelling it. I love how you can just throw it into something and taste southeast asia. Fish sauce, coconut milk, lemongrass, chicken- you are most of the way to a nice quick soup. Even better with some chillies in it. Fantastic.

As opposed to brussel sprouts. I don't hate them, but I can count the number of times I have had a second helping of sprouts on the fingers of one hand. They just never tasted or smelled particularly good to me.

[paula]

I feel the same way about lemongrass. Cooking with it makes me happy.

And I completely agree with re-trying foods regularly. That's how I became a "reformed" picky eater. Actually, it's mostly been a feeling that I might like something now rather than tasting it first. I distinctly remember having dinner with a friend in my 20s, and she got a burger with onions and mushrooms. I'd always hated onions and mushrooms, but for some reason, watching her eat that, I thought: You know, that sounds kind of good. Next time I got a burger, I ordered it the same way, and loved it. And ever since then I love onions and mushrooms and will eat them however they're prepared. That one dish unlocked the door.

It's happened to me a lot since then, and I can even start sensing in myself how I might come around eventually on certain foods, even if I'm not quite ready right then. But green peppers? Nope. That day of reckoning will never come.

[mncharm]

If there is anything worse on this earth than Dr. Brown's Cel-Ray pop, I am not aware of it, and don't want to be.

[aaalex]

mncharm: not to wreck your day or anything, but if we're getting to the worst drink? i think cynar, an aperitif that tastes like artichokes is the worst thing around, hands down. it's an italian bitter, so you'd expect a little bitterness - think campari - but the aftertaste of artichoke is gag-inducing, for me anyway.

[mncharm]

Barf.

[osffan]

Has someone already mentioned Marcel's upcoming TV series here? Marcel's Quantum Kitchen:
http://www.syfy.com/marcelsquantumkitchen/team/marcel_vigneron
And, what just makes me shake my head in disappointment is the link for Marcel's bio has this header--Marcel's Quantum Kitchen | Team--but there are no listings for any team members. It's all Marcel. It seems so typical. Marcel talks the talk of team but in reality, it's all about him and only him. Will I watch? I'll try to catch the first couple of episodes just to see if this other "real Marcel" makes an appearance. But, do I have high hopes of liking what I see. Truthfully, sadly, no.

[ri]

Ally: The difference in color of bell peppers is caused by when they are picked, not because they are actually different.

[ally]

ri: my point is that they are picked when they aren't ripe, so even though they appear to be red (and ripe) they are actually not ripe. they've learned how to artificially make them change color prematurely. same with tomatoes.

[Naomi]

There is so very much I am loving in this comments thread. I_Heart_SkilletDoux

[aaalex]

i think it's probably too late to keep this particular thread going. the rankings are coming soon and we'll be on to something else, but i've been wondering what evolutionary purpose is served by the dislike of certain foods - or the liking of others, for that matter. i mean, it's interesting to read about the violent negative reactions to cilantro and celery, but ... celery is food. it's nourishing, so why should we dislike it?

in the so-called animal kingdom, a disagreeable taste can serve a very useful purpose. the monarch butterfly, for instance, secretes a vile tasting toxin. the toxin rarely kills the birds who are the monarch butterfly's chief predator, but once they've tasted monarch they usually vomit and never touch another monarch as long as they live. the monarch taste is so disgusting - apparently ... i mean, i've never tried one - that butterflies that look like monarchs are avoided by predators. so, one can say there's a reason for things to taste bad.

but why should food - or combinations of flavours - put us off from what could nourish us? i know this kind of speculation is pretty idle, but does celery remind certain humans of something potentially poisonous? (when i was 14, i drank half a bottle of rye with friends. i've never been able to touch rye since. i know very well my body takes it as a poison and i don't blame it.) or is it more that, in evolutionary terms, it's good to have members of a population who are not competing for certain foods? i mean given a large population, is it better that some don't like carrots, while others won't eat meat and still others can't stand eggs?

if there's an evolutionary biologist out there, it'd be cool to hear the speculation. (cool to me, i mean.)

[jh]

There is some speculation that picky eating has evolutionary roots. Aversion to fruits and veggies would be tendency to avoid poisonous foods such as berries and certain ruffage. Picky eating starts to show around toddler age (1-3) and often grows out of it by 4-5. If you think about it, for the first 1+ years, babies are often breast fed, so they don't have to worry about any bad foods entering their system. But as they grow more independent and start exploring the world with their mouth, being picky could have its advantages.

Bitter foods are an acquired taste because it is a taste often associated with poisons. Sour is sometimes a signal for unripe, and spicy can be used as a defense mechanism. However, exposure to different tastes from a young age can help shape tastes later on. While aversion to certain tastes/food may have an inherent component, there is also some speculation that the children also takes social cues from the people around them. From the child's point of view, "If my parents don't eat broccoli, why should I?"

[bryanD]

"bryanD: Although I, personally, could live an entire summer eating nothing but fresh cantaloupe and panzanella, your cleverly wordsmithed rant made me laugh, and that, I appreciate."---infinity728

Thanks. It wrote itself. It was a soul post.

"Has someone already mentioned Marcel's upcoming TV series here? Marcel's Quantum Kitchen:"---ossfan

Since TV in America operates on a rigid 10-year cultural delay---i.e. beatniks emerge in society, 1948; beatniks show up on TV: 1958, etc---Marcel's and Blais' MG novelty acts might turn out to be the muscles twitching of a thing that's passing away. (Blais can be Rigor and Marcel can be Mortis!)

"...if there's an evolutionary biologist out there, it'd be cool to hear the speculation."---aaalex

Terroir (microscopic universe) defines taste reception of groups that swim within it across a large interval of history. Let's call it terrestrial yin-yang minus community taboos.

That's my theory and I'm sticking to it. (It certainly helps explain why the peripatetic USA is the finicky-eaters' hot zone of our entire solar system.)

[Karen]

Can't sort thru 350+ comments, but I wanted to say that if the team Dale put together for this episode actually went out and opened a restaurant, they'd kill.

[Cooper]

Celery is fine. I like broccoli quite a bit. Cantaloupe tastes good but gives me the runs. Green peppers make me fart. I love, love, love brussels sprouts, but that love isn't shared among my siblings.

Cilantro will never foul the kitchen of any home I ever live in. I hate it with an indefinable passion. The smell of it makes me gag. Forget that hoo-ha about "most people will eat it chopped", or "it's only the stems that taste bad." That's horseshit. (Horseshit being something I'd rather eat than the merest smidge of cilantro) I'm with Fabio on this and it's nice to know I can confidently eat at his restaurants without fear of that evil weed.

[KinderJ]

Cooper- C'mon man. That aint cool. You're gonna make cilantro cry, and that would just be weird and awkward for everyone...

[aaalex]

kinderj: i think you're wrong, man. i love cooper's nuanced description of his sometimes fraught relationship to cilantro. carry on, cooper, carry on.

jh: thanks for your post.

[aaalex]

bryanD: obscure but interesting. still, you'd think constant movement - from one terroir to another - could as easily lead to NON-finicky eating, to catholicity of taste, as to american pickiness. and north americans certainly are picky - most picky continent? - think of all the things we won't (or rarely) eat: snails, monkeys, horse, dog, hot spices, pig tail, pig feet, stinky cheeses, goat meat, cow brains, insects of any sort ... the north american list of what constitutes proper food is certainly shorter than its asian counterpart.