artdeco73
Well-Known Member
- Joined
- Apr 26, 2004
- Messages
- 58
- Reaction score
- 0
Greetings,
If anyone out there enjoys entertaining at home, I would love to hear your opinions.
Traditionally, at least in the U.S., when you invited people over for a meal, you served food in large serving vessels (dishes, bowls, etc.) that got passed around the table. People took what they wanted in the amounts they wanted (hopefully within limits of propriety). I love to cook for people, but I have a big problem with this approach.
First of all, as a creative cook, I attempt to balance and coordinate flavors in each course. If I am serving meat A with side dishes B and C, they are all meant to complement each other. If someone chooses not to eat side dish B because they don't like it and take more of C instead, the course, and thus my creation, becomes incomplete.
In addition, the viusual aspect of a meal is very important. I like to coordinate not only flavors and textures but also colors, and I arrange the components in a visually pleasing way, which dictates assembling everything in the kitchen and bringing individual plates to the table and putting them in front of guests.
Finally, rejecting, however implicitly, a dish when you are a guest bothers me on prinicple. When I invite people for dinner, I always ask if there are any foods they cannot or would not eat. That's their opportunity to make their requirements and desires known, and I always respect what they tell me. Once that is done, however, I feel that they have committed to eating what I make. This stems from the fact that I strongly believe that anyone who claims to enjoy eating has a responsibility to him/herself and others to train their taste to enjoy all foods, assuming it is medically safe. Extreme? Opinionated? Inflexible? Excessively harsh? Perhaps. But I do believe this.
The arguments against this approach are pretty obvious. Some people would consider it presumptuous for me to dictate what the guests would like, in what combination and what quantity and arrange it for them. It is also thought to eliminate the opportunity for seconds (this is not actually true -- I always offer seconds if there is any left, but most people shouldn't be asking for seconds to begin with). Finally, bizzarre though it may seem, there are people out there who have never grown out of their childhood obsession with keeping everything separate on their plates, and my approach of artistically arranging things with sauces and garnishes smashes that obsession on the spot.
So, am I being draconian? My S.O., who obviously co-hosts all of these dinners (although I do most of the cooking) thinks it's perfectly fine, but she is a foodie, and that's how I've been cooking for her for ten years. But the only guests I've done it with so far were avowed foodies whom I knew to be not just accepting but excited about my approach, and who did the same for us at their houses. For others, I've given in to passing around serving platters.
Any thoughts or comments? Thank you all in advance.
Best Regards,
Tony
If anyone out there enjoys entertaining at home, I would love to hear your opinions.
Traditionally, at least in the U.S., when you invited people over for a meal, you served food in large serving vessels (dishes, bowls, etc.) that got passed around the table. People took what they wanted in the amounts they wanted (hopefully within limits of propriety). I love to cook for people, but I have a big problem with this approach.
First of all, as a creative cook, I attempt to balance and coordinate flavors in each course. If I am serving meat A with side dishes B and C, they are all meant to complement each other. If someone chooses not to eat side dish B because they don't like it and take more of C instead, the course, and thus my creation, becomes incomplete.
In addition, the viusual aspect of a meal is very important. I like to coordinate not only flavors and textures but also colors, and I arrange the components in a visually pleasing way, which dictates assembling everything in the kitchen and bringing individual plates to the table and putting them in front of guests.
Finally, rejecting, however implicitly, a dish when you are a guest bothers me on prinicple. When I invite people for dinner, I always ask if there are any foods they cannot or would not eat. That's their opportunity to make their requirements and desires known, and I always respect what they tell me. Once that is done, however, I feel that they have committed to eating what I make. This stems from the fact that I strongly believe that anyone who claims to enjoy eating has a responsibility to him/herself and others to train their taste to enjoy all foods, assuming it is medically safe. Extreme? Opinionated? Inflexible? Excessively harsh? Perhaps. But I do believe this.
The arguments against this approach are pretty obvious. Some people would consider it presumptuous for me to dictate what the guests would like, in what combination and what quantity and arrange it for them. It is also thought to eliminate the opportunity for seconds (this is not actually true -- I always offer seconds if there is any left, but most people shouldn't be asking for seconds to begin with). Finally, bizzarre though it may seem, there are people out there who have never grown out of their childhood obsession with keeping everything separate on their plates, and my approach of artistically arranging things with sauces and garnishes smashes that obsession on the spot.
So, am I being draconian? My S.O., who obviously co-hosts all of these dinners (although I do most of the cooking) thinks it's perfectly fine, but she is a foodie, and that's how I've been cooking for her for ten years. But the only guests I've done it with so far were avowed foodies whom I knew to be not just accepting but excited about my approach, and who did the same for us at their houses. For others, I've given in to passing around serving platters.
Any thoughts or comments? Thank you all in advance.
Best Regards,
Tony
