[Sneakeater]

From a thread on the New York Board discussing a particular new restaurant:

Part of the problem might be that when I eat in US cities outside of NY, SF, Chicago and Vegas I find that people get excited about dishes and combinations that are a little dated.

There is no such thing as dated cuisine, except in a few people's minds, but I do agree that very few North American cities have a restaurant that would crack the top 30 in New York. I think Susur Lee's experience is instructive. I liked Shang much better than the critics, but even I did not think it was a top-30 place, yet in Toronto he was (and is) the top of the heap. And Toronto is a cosmopolitan city.

well, we're in general agreement then. By dated I mean being excited about flavors or ingredients or combinations that aren't really novel. Sweetbreads or fennel or Panna cotta or something.

I don't understand why people resist the idea that cuisine can get dated.

It seems strange to claim that cuisine, alone out of all areas of human endeavor, is immune to fashion.

Styles of architecture can get dated. Styles of visual arts can get dated. Styles of theatrical and opera production can get dated.

But cuisine can't?

[ghostrider]

I don't care what they say, fennel is timeless,

[g.johnson]

One difference is that food is consumed whereas old buildings are not. We don't need any new gothic buildings to appreciate the style. But if people stopped making quenelles de brochet we wouldn't know how good they are.

[Sneakeater]

I was thinking about that distinction. It's true, of course.

But the fact is that the level of appreciation for someting like quenelles de brochet will vary during different periods -- just like the level of appreciation of Gothic architecture.

There was a time in the late 19th Century when classical music listeners didn't like Mozart much. For most of the 20th Century, continuing on into now, he was considered supreme. Notwithstanding changes in performance practice, the music remained the same.

[flyfish]

As Dr. J. says. New is not necessarily better. Sure, there is trendy food - and there is cuisine that transcends all of that. Panna cotta isn't less tasty because somebody down the road puts squid testicle foam on toast points. If all you care about it what's trendy in food, you'll be missing out on yummy, well-prepared classic stuff.

[Sneakeater]

But even among classic stuff, different classics will be appreciated more or less at different times.

It's not like there's some static conception of what's good. There was a time when early Renaissance painters were patronized as "primitives". Now, most people consider them giants of Western art. Who knows what the consensus will be 75 years from now?

Also, for all that people abjure newer things as "trendy", in food as in art, I would say that if you don't engage with what's current, you're not really experiencing the form itself. You're only bathing in the comfortable.

I mean, so-called classical music fans who only listen to Brahms. As far as I'm concerned, they don't even like music. They just want to take milk baths.

[Orik]

To whoever is claiming fashion and technology are not changing food very rapidly, I propose taking a look at the Time Life Foods of The World series.

[LML]

Gastronomic pretence dates. Food doesn't.

[LML]

But even among classic stuff, different classics will be appreciated more or less at different times.

It's not like there's some static conception of what's good. There was a time when early Renaissance painters were patronized as "primitives". Now, most people consider them giants of Western art. Who knows what the consensus will be 75 years from now?

Also, for all that people abjure newer things as "trendy", in food as in art, I would say that if you don't engage with what's current, you're not really experiencing the form itself. You're only bathing in the comfortable.

I mean, so-called classical music fans who only listen to Brahms. As far as I'm concerned, they don't even like music. They just want to take milk baths.

If there were anything to the food/art analogy, you might have a point, but there isn't so you don't.

[flyfish]

But even among classic stuff, different classics will be appreciated more or less at different times.

True, which is why nobody should be putting people down for getting excited about a combination that is new to them but is passe to the trendy.

[Lex]

Panna cotta isn't less tasty because somebody down the road puts squid testicle foam on toast points.

I need to get up to Canada ASAP.

[ghostrider]

Panna cotta isn't less tasty because somebody down the road puts squid testicle foam on toast points.

I need to get up to Canada ASAP.

Are you running towards or away from the squid testicle foam?

[balex]

One of the functions of cuisine, like any other cultural product, is to articulate social differences.
As cultural trends get diffused broadly through the culture, there will be a demand for innovations so that people can express
the fact that they are, say, elite well-educated urbanites. Restaurateurs are clearly going to meet that demand.

The old trends will thus be perceived as dated, as they no longer fulfill their previous function.

[flyfish]

Panna cotta isn't less tasty because somebody down the road puts squid testicle foam on toast points.

I need to get up to Canada ASAP.

Are you running towards or away from the squid testicle foam?

<trendoid>
Oh, but squid testicle foam on toast points is SO last month!
</trendoid>

[Orik]

Gastronomic pretence dates. Food doesn't.

Restaurant food is not the same as food. Much of what is served (and therefore swallowed by the blogging masses as being fashionable) is the result of technological advances that have little to do with flavor and much to do with mass production, advance preparation, reduction of labor, reduction of outliers, regulation, economics, changes in perception of what is (un)healthy food, and even changes in dress code.