Top Ten Worst Food Trends of the Decade

You're tough!

You've gone beyond Sturgeon's Law. You've even gone beyond the Ivory Soap Level!!!

Only one one/thousandth (and try saying that out loud) of what you experience isn't crap? Wow!

I agree with you re deconstruction in that it shows a chef is thinking seriously (and analyzing seriously) about the constitution of a dish. That analysis of the components leads one to consider how that dish might be altered or changed (made either better, or different).

I also agree that deconstructionism is fraught with peril, especially at the hands of lesser chefs. And it will fade---has already faded---as a trend in dining.

In regards to wine and food pairing, one of the most popular and successful seminars I've ever done was the one where we line up a series of different styles of wines and then array some essential food types on a plate, and allow the participants to go through an exercise of 'group' tasting and discussion (gently guided, of course, so there's some structure to it). That allows people to consciously thing of what their taste buds are doing with A) the food, B) the wine, and C) the effect of the foods and wines together in the mouth.

And that, essentially, is deconstructionism. It also allows everyone to come to their own understanding, while at the same time perceiving that everyone else is doing the same with their own palate.

Then, the next level is to approach fully-realized dishes (usually the same bland protein base with a variety of different sauces) tasted in sequence with each wine type. By then the participants can appreciate the effects of different components on the wine/food combos, and figure out their own 'adjustments'.

It's fascinating, as a "coach" to see the people progress through these stages, and to watch lights start shining in people's eyes. Most people don't normally think all that much about their foods, interestingly enough.

It's fascinating, as a "coach" to see the people progress through these stages, and to watch lights start shining in people's eyes. Most people don't normally think all that much about their foods, interestingly enough.

So wait a minute. If these people aren't thinking of food, then what do they think about?

Rahsaan,

If you ever get to Chicago be sure to check out Moto. I'll bet it would be right up your alley.

Thanks for the recommendation. Although for the record, I'm not a rabid follower of molecular gastronomy or anything, I just thought April's comment was a bit extreme.

As was my 99.9999% comment...

It's fascinating, as a "coach" to see the people progress through these stages, and to watch lights start shining in people's eyes. Most people don't normally think all that much about their foods, interestingly enough.

So wait a minute. If these people aren't thinking of food, then what do they think about?

I didn't say they weren't thinking about food---I said they weren't thinking about foodS.

Most people, in most circumstances, aren't thinking on the conscious level about the constituents, or effects, of the foods they are eating. Mostly, they're responding on the sensory (feeling) level only, and not the conscious thought level. It's more like the "Mmm, this is good" than the analytic reflection of what why it's good, and what goes into making it good.

In your cocktail zone, for instance: you are somewhat unusual in that you actually pay attention to the tastes you're getting when you sip a cocktail (as in,whether it is a brandy old fashion (sweeter, mellower, less vanilla/butterscotch) or a whiskey old fashion (more oak effect, more oak, more of a bite from the grain blend) in your drink. And you go beyond that to try to parse how much and what kind of bitters were used. And how watery it is.

Most people don't do that. Most people respond with a positive or a negative---but curiously (to me, anyway) they seldom bother to think about the WHY of a a positive or negative. Food is often the same way for people like this. They are recipients of something that is produced. As recipients, they either like or don't like. Versus chefs (and mixologists, and wine geeks), who actually occupy brain cells with considering what is making up what they're tasting.

And while I'm ranting, I'll just keep on going.

One of the probs with this culture---and I'm often as much to blame as the great unwashed masses out there, I'm ashamed to admit---is that we are often NOT thinking about the food we eat when we're eating it. I have a terrible habit of eating while I am reading (my worst), surfing the internet, watching tv, etc. But then eating becomes a secondary, supportive and unconscious act. And yeah, although its changing, that's still one of the differences between Euro habits and American habits, sadly.

Only one one/thousandth (and try saying that out loud) of what you experience isn't crap?

Writing on behalf of my fellow numerically-minded pedants, I'd like to point out this isn't entirely accurate; what Rahsaan said was that only one one-millionth of what you experience isn't crap

Only one one/thousandth (and try saying that out loud) of what you experience isn't crap?

Writing on behalf of my fellow numerically-minded pedants, I'd like to point out this isn't entirely accurate; what Rahsaan said was that only one one-millionth of what you experience isn't crap

Even tougher than I thought!

He's never been quite the same after traveling through Napa Valley.

To me the worst trend is to place layer upon layer of things on a plate. Lasagna, tiramisu or a trifle are fine, however, look at any of the "chef" cooking show and every plate consists of layer upon layer of "stuff". To be really successful the dish must also contain 2 -6 elements that you would not thing of putting together. Of course the presentation has to have perhaps a foam but definitely some sort of liquid maybe two or three that are squirted on the plate by a squeeze bottle or dripped or drizzled off a spoon.

A second trend is that there is only one correct temperature to serve a meat.

A third trend is for the fast food and franchise food industry to take the name of a dish, call it a sauce and then completely bastardize it. Alfredo and Carbonera are dishes not sauces!!

A fourth trend is the practice in most operations of the "managers" not working the floor. In many operations this leads to the wait staff spending their time back at a station instead of servicing their customers. The manager is hiding in the office or out of site. A busy food operation is like an orchestra. To run smoothly when "performing" the conductor needs to be out in front. The lack of adequate training and overseeing is quite apparent.

A fifth trend is that "Heirloom" is always better.

A sixth trend is due to the marketing of the American Angus Association people believe that angus beef is better and worth a higher price. As someone whose family raised beef cattle for three generations it is a joke.

A seventh trend is that organic is always better. Being better it is worth more money. The best example of a joke here is "organic" maple syrup. I don't know of anyone in MN or WI who uses any chemicals or has ever used chemicals in their maple forests.

"Sliders" originally was an endearing term used to describe White Castle Hamburgers and only White Castle Hamburgers!
Everytime I have anyone visit from outside the US I always introduce them to "Sliders".

It's fascinating, as a "coach" to see the people progress through these stages, and to watch lights start shining in people's eyes. Most people don't normally think all that much about their foods, interestingly enough.

So wait a minute. If these people aren't thinking of food, then what do they think about?

I didn't say they weren't thinking about food---I said they weren't thinking about foodS.

Most people, in most circumstances, aren't thinking on the conscious level about the constituents, or effects, of the foods they are eating. Mostly, they're responding on the sensory (feeling) level only, and not the conscious thought level. It's more like the "Mmm, this is good" than the analytic reflection of what why it's good, and what goes into making it good.

In your cocktail zone, for instance: you are somewhat unusual in that you actually pay attention to the tastes you're getting when you sip a cocktail (as in,whether it is a brandy old fashion (sweeter, mellower, less vanilla/butterscotch) or a whiskey old fashion (more oak effect, more oak, more of a bite from the grain blend) in your drink. And you go beyond that to try to parse how much and what kind of bitters were used. And how watery it is.

Most people don't do that. Most people respond with a positive or a negative---but curiously (to me, anyway) they seldom bother to think about the WHY of a a positive or negative. Food is often the same way for people like this. They are recipients of something that is produced. As recipients, they either like or don't like. Versus chefs (and mixologists, and wine geeks), who actually occupy brain cells with considering what is making up what they're tasting.

And while I'm ranting, I'll just keep on going.

One of the probs with this culture---and I'm often as much to blame as the great unwashed masses out there, I'm ashamed to admit---is that we are often NOT thinking about the food we eat when we're eating it. I have a terrible habit of eating while I am reading (my worst), surfing the internet, watching tv, etc. But then eating becomes a secondary, supportive and unconscious act. And yeah, although its changing, that's still one of the differences between Euro habits and American habits, sadly.

Dead-on correct, of course, and a very good rant!

Still puzzling, though, for someone who spends about 3/4 of each day thinking about what the next meal will be.

I also think April is harsh on deconstruction. When you look at the top restaurants and chefs that attract the "foodie" crowd, these chefs are providing an intellectual and not just visceral experience. These are not the places one goes just to eat. Deconstruction is a technical step in the analysis of food to help the chef and diner understand what the components are and how they work together add up to more than the sum of the parts.

In lesser hands, deconstruction stops being analytic and it becomes pure method. Easy to go astray, so I understand April's problem with this becoming faddish.

GeoC rightly admonishes "Black Angus", which is simply corporate branding. But Organic is not generally being proffered as better (quality or healthier). It is extra information that helps many consumers make environmentally ethical choices in what they eat. There is probably a weak correlation between organic products and freshness from local sourcing, but my sampling is limited to a handful of American regions where local organic products tend to be featured on local menus. I do not think we should begrudge restaurateurs for informing their customers of their preference for organic when possible.

i think bernard got my point. when it becomes pure method and not about food anymore.

i suppose it's not too far a stretch to think some chefs go in for a little pissing contest now and then - and that's where i become wary when food becomes too technical. maybe that's what i mean about the difference between analysis and thinking.

but also to rashaan's point, i do concede that i must not mistake concept for execution and maybe there have been times when a badly executed concept made me question the execution.

but that being said... i'm really not a fan of the fad, as a fad as such. but if it done to enhance the taste of the food, then go right ahead

I also think April is harsh on deconstruction. When you look at the top restaurants and chefs that attract the "foodie" crowd, these chefs are providing an intellectual and not just visceral experience. These are not the places one goes just to eat. Deconstruction is a technical step in the analysis of food to help the chef and diner understand what the components are and how they work together add up to more than the sum of the parts.

In lesser hands, deconstruction stops being analytic and it becomes pure method. Easy to go astray, so I understand April's problem with this becoming faddish.

GeoC rightly admonishes "Black Angus", which is simply corporate branding. But Organic is not generally being proffered as better (quality or healthier). It is extra information that helps many consumers make environmentally ethical choices in what they eat. There is probably a weak correlation between organic products and freshness from local sourcing, but my sampling is limited to a handful of American regions where local organic products tend to be featured on local menus. I do not think we should begrudge restaurateurs for informing their customers of their preference for organic when possible.

(a) When I dine (as opposed to merely "eating") I focus in great depth on both flavor and aroma sensations as well as on the methodology by which the dish was prepared.
(b) When I dine with wine (which is quite frequently) I focus not only on the above but on the wine and on the match between the wine and the dish
(c) Neither (a) nor (b) deprive me for one instant of the pleasures of dining

All something akin to making love, n'est ce pas vrai? Fortunately, I only rarely dine and make love simultaneously. That might indeed overwhelm both the senses and the intellect.

Best
Rogov

All something akin to making love, n'est ce pas vrai? Fortunately, I only rarely dine and make love simultaneously.

George, I mean Daniel...have you ever eaten a pastrami sandwich while in bed with a woman?

Interesting thread.

Agree about when the century starts and of course I celebrated only on the correct date.

I, too, woud be happy to see the last of 'heirloom' related to food. It reminds me of dusty old furniture, certainly not tasty.

I agree that decorating a plate so that it looks like it was held behnd a screen door in a shit storm is passe, and should die the death.

Disagree about deconstructionism, except insofar as it has become a buzz word. I think that this approach in cooking, while difficult to carry off well sometimes (there are reasons certain foods are usually srved with certain other foods - they both taste better!) can be most interesting. Rather along the lines of a component wine tasting - wouldn't want to do it every day, but it reminds one just what elements make up what we put in our mouths.

Like all writers, I am sure this guy's goal was primarily to fill up so many column-inches, not to posit things that would be logically unassailable.

Oh yeah - and big disagreement about bacon. Bacon is good with anything.

I will admit to indulging in sliders. But they are composed of foie gras and they do not come on buns.....