Monday, November 16, 2009

Naming Conventions

I have to admit, in the interest of full disclosure, that I've been guilty of that which I'm about to rant in the past and have since reformed my ways. Actually, no I haven't. I've just grown up a little bit.

Also, by 'you' I mean chefs everywhere.

LET'S GET OVER THE STUPID NAMING CONVENTIONS ON MENUS. There, I've said it. Well, Andy, what do you mean 'naming conventions'. What I mean is let's call a spade a spade. About .001% of the dining public gives a shit that you're cooking your egg at 61.5 degrees C. Just call it a soft egg and be done with it. Also, nobody gives a shit that something was cooked sous vide. You don't write 'cooked in a copper pot' on your menu. Sous vide is simply a technique and the circ. is a tool, much like a copper pot or stand mixer. Can you imagine a dessert menu that said 'Carrot cake made in a stand mixer'. No, you can't and possibly don't care.

How about this gem? Calling a piece of peeled tomato flesh 'tomato sashimi'. Hello? Wouldn't simply 'tomato' suffice? AND....carrot confit? Technically, confit means cooked in its own fat and I have yet to come across a carrot that had fat, so..... If by carrot 'confit' you mean a carrot cooked in carrot juice, then say carrot cooked in carrot juice or how about this one: carrot. Here's where we get to the root of the problem. Carrot cooked in carrot juice doesn't sound nearly as sexy as carrot confit.

This last one I've been especially guilty of in the past: using quotes on the menu. OK, three things. 1) using quotes to be whimsical and show that you're not taking the literal definition of a technique was really cool when Keller did it in the 90's. It's getting lame now. 2) Using quotes on the menu isn't your license to screw up whatever you put quotes around. Oh, so you don't really know how to make a perfect Sauce Bernaise, so put quotes around it and it can be your own little 'riff'. It's not a riff. It's lame. 3) Using quotes to describe that you're 'doing a play on' something is so last week, too. The dining public isn't stupid. If you've got a concord grape sorbet and a peanut butter tart, they get the fact that it's peanut butter and jelly. Call it what it is and be done with it. If the guest doesn't 'get it', 9 times out of 10 it's not because you didn't put the name in quotes, it's because it was a horrible idea to begin with.

I'll say this again. I've been guilty of most of, if not all of the above in my career. That doesn't make it right.

All chefs have egos. We desperately want to be separated from the crowd, because let's face it, there are a ton of talented chefs out there. I think that in our striving to stand out, we're taking too many liberties when writing menus. The conventional wisdom is that if we can write a sexy, shocking menu with lots of buzz words and techniques, our restaurant will get discovered and that will lead to people beating down the doors on a tuesday night. That might be true and in the age of the internet and PR firms, menus can be viewed by anyone with an internet connection. However, I'm preferring to go the other way(are any of you frequent readers surprised that I'm a little different?) and follow a 'less is more' rule when writing menus. Sure, the technique will still be there and the same amount of ingredients will be there. Yes, I will still notate which farms our products come from because I believe that these remarkable products stand apart because of the people who raise them. It's not just a sneaker. It's a Nike sneaker and by that logic, it's not just a pig, it's a Rettland Farms pig and that matters; if it didn't matter, I'd leave it off. I want our restaurant to be judged on the merits of our food and service; not on whether or not I'm using all the current trendy buzzwords on the menu. You don't eat the menu, do you? The bottom line in all of this blabber is the question that I always come back to: 'How does it eat?'

If the answer is 'that's the best piece of food I've ever put in my mouth', then who needs a menu?

11 comments:

bakerquest said...

Here's where we get to the root of the problem. Carrot...

Now admit whether or not you did that on purpose.

Nic Heckett said...

How about 'Prosciutto Americano' which translates directly and simply as 'American Ham'...... Italian is one of the least spoken languages in North America, why invoke the Italian 'Prosciutto' rather than the Spanish 'Jamon' or the French 'Jambon', both worthy languages with a native speaking historic North American population? Especially when the product 'Prosciutto' most often refers to a cooked or wet-cure "City Ham" or "Paris Ham" - in Italian menu parlance "cotto" - as opposed to "crudo" - as in "dry-cured' - "stagionata" or "aged/hung". We love Italian, but leave it to the Italians.

Chef Andrew Little said...

Nic,

You've hit the nail squarely on the head. I'll qualify this by saying that I'm biased: I love high quality American foodstuffs. That being said, I've tasted hams from the US that rival their European counterparts. Actually, I've tasted all kinds of foods that rival or SURPASS their European counterparts. I think the main reason for mixing in 'jambon' and 'prosciutto' is that for years having a sexy foreign name on your product meant that it HAD to be good. Right now, there is nothing wrong with saying American Ham....in fact, there IS something sexy about it. The quality is what matters and the more people who can become cheerleaders for products that are truly remarkable the sooner we'll see our 'American Ham' popping up in Spain and France!

Thanks for your thoughtful comment and for reading the blog!

Beau said...

I agree, it's time for America to start getting some respect when it comes to good food.

But how do we convey the difference between an *American Ham*, a high quality food made in the US from a pig that was raised and slaughtered correctly and then taken to a craftsman who slowly, carefully and methodically creates "Ham", -from- the ass end of a too-lean hog that tastes like it was cured in bath water and smoked over burning armpit hair, with about 150 thousand other "hams"? How do we explain to people that nowhere on the pig is there a muscle that is exactly 4"x6"x12", perfect for slicing behind the deli counter?

Maybe we'll take the word "ham" and they should call theirs "ham approximation"?

Chef Andrew Little said...

Beau,

Your point is something that I've been considering for quite a few years and have even floated this idea in front of a few 'government folks' to no good end. You're 100% correct that there needs to be some way for general public to delineate quality and artisan work. I've proposed coming up with a system not unlike the French AOC or Italian DOCG where products are shown in front of a panel of shop owners, chefs and producers. After sight and taste evaluation, each product is given a score. Products with a high enough score earn this quality stamp and the right to produce said product for three years until they must show in front of the panel again to prove consistency. Let's be honest. Programs such as PA Preferred are nice, but I'm in search of a marker that raises the bar to a superior, worthy of the world stage quality level. Maybe only 1% of products get the stamp, maybe less. Maybe 15% get it. I don't know and don't care. If the product is worthy, world worthy, then it should get a designation.

Gotta tell you though, nothing gets my juices flowing like smoking over burnt armpit hairs!!!

Beau said...

Any certifying body similar to what you are proposing would have to be non-governmental. Like we have learned with PA Preferred, gov. agencies won't want to (maybe can't) be exclusive of enough producers to end up with a certification that means anything.

There are lots of third party groups out there that certify for anything from organic status to animal welfare practices--this would be no different. The challenge would be gaining worldwide (hell, even nationwide for starters) recognition and respect for the certification. It would only take time and money...

Love the idea, though. I think you ought to take that currently unused 28th hour of your day to head up this effort, and then act as the founding executive director!

Nic Heckett said...

well, I can sell you polenta for more than grits and I know one ham maker who sells the same country ham at $6.50 and prosciutto for $20.

Rich said...

Slow Food, Heritage Foods, etc....There are already recognized "foodie" orgs that would qualify for this job and yes, the government IS NOT the place to go.

The need is NOT for government designation, the need is for a nationally recognized and legit body to come up with these categories and then market the hell out of why it's important.

It's a good idea, all around and the wheel probably doesn't need to be re-invented.

Now where did that "28th Hour" go.......

Beau said...

Point well taken, Nic Heckett

Nic Heckett said...

Beau, perhaps we can do it the same way they do in Italy. They have mostly very bad ham, grown in almost an identical manner to our CAFO operations, fed corn/soy 16% protein etc. Most of this is imported from Denmark and Holland. Most of this is processed identically to ham in Ireland, England, and the USA, the classic boiled ham, city ham etc. This is called prosciutto 'cotto', or 'cooked' ham'. Most dry cured or 'crudo' ham is also made from imported pigs. My main respect for Parma goes tho their ability to make a consistently superior product from a consistently questionable CAFO meat. Italians distinguish a ham of great character by looking for its authenticity, in the same way they distinguish traditional wine or cheese from a factory product. I think the average to sophisticated US 'foodie' consumer can do the same.

nhallfreelance said...

Chef,

I agree with just about everything you say here, with one notable exception. I undrestand your issue with using terms like Sous-Vide for their cultural cache and effete sense of sexines, yet wonder wether it is accurate to say noting that cooking method on the menu is inherently ridiculous. When you serve, say, a wood grilled item on your menu, I assume you would indicate that it is grilled over wood, rather than steamed/poached/fried/braised, etc. The cooking method has an intrinsic effect on the finished dish, and most people want to know (at least something) about how their food is being prepared. A piece of meat prepared sous-vide in an immersion circulator will have different characteristcs than the same piece of meat simply seared off on a flat top, even if that diference is merely the lack of color change that (so I understand) is one of the results of that cooking method. My point is, calling things something they are not is obviously a ridiculous menu affectation (confit of carrots, for example), but providing useful information such as cooking method seems like a fairly straightforward way of informing the consumer about what it is they are ordering. Of course, you could just go the Achatz direction, and give your diners nothing to go on but a list of ingredients, with no indication as to their organization or preparation, or even the basic form those ingredients might take. I actually kind of like that sense of surprise, but it might be seen as its own type of affectation. Thoughts?