My father likes his steak well done, and by well done I mean incinerated. And also, not coincidentally, he has the most unsophisticated palate of anyone you’ll ever meet; you can count on two hands the number of things he will actually eat. He eats today the way he did when he was six, and what better definition of “unsophisticated” could you want?
I hope you all can see the difference between making an analogy and pulling out the race card. You’re saying that the chef should be free to give a less desireable piece of meat to those who don’t share his tastes. I’m saying no, he’s got to treat all of his customers equally. Simple as that.
Oh, so now your advocating communism? :dubious:
I have a DREAM… that all steak consumers will be judged by the content of their character and not the doneness of their steak…
We’re on page 4, and no one has mentioned A-1 sauce yet?
I’m pretty sure it has been mentioned already.
This may finally be the time, the place, the moment to share our Chicago Chop House horror story.
My father told me years ago that true filet mignon was cooked only to a specific level of doneness, that that was part of what made it filet mignon (along with the bacon). Now that I’ve read (most of) this thread, I realize he probably meant that when you order a fine cut of beef, you don’t burn the hell outta it.
Or maybe not.
My dad’s method of grilling relied heavily on spraying the coals with water from a Plochman’s bottle. His grill had a little window, and you could always see massive clouds of smoke and ash swirling around in there. He burned everything to a crisp, and I learned to love ketchup.
Anyway.
About 10 years ago, we went to the Chop House to celebrate my husband getting his Ph.D. I was trying my damndest to be at least a little bit sophisticated, back when I had illusions about what being the Dr. and Mrs. was all bout, so when the waitress was taking our order, I asked her about his statement. “Isn’t filet mignon automatically cooked to a specific level of doneness? That’s what my father always said.” She leaned over the table and sneered, dripping venom, “This isn’t McDonald’s. You can order it any way you want.”
We tipped her $.02.
You are correct; I missed it. So much for superpowers.
Well, it will never be seen on page 4, but I had to post this anyway.
One of my best friends was a student at Kansas State and in an animal husbandry course the entire class was taken to a room lit with red lights so that all of the beef looked identical. The identical cuts of meat were cooked to all of the different levels of doneness. Every single person in the class chose ‘Rare’ as the most flavorful and best quality, and according to the professor no one had ever selected anything above medium-rare.
Admittedly this is second-hand anecdotal information but I have no reason to believe that it is false.
I have a friend who orders well-done. (I am a rare to medium rare person myself) Seems to me that almost all of your really good steakhouses do NOT guarantee the quality of the steak when someone orders it well-done. In fact, many steakhouses have to butterfly a filet just to get the center of the meat to that desired temperature.
I don’t think ordering a steak well-done makes you unsophisticated, but I do agree that steakhouses have every reason to tell their customers that they do not encourage people to order steaks well-done and that they do not guarantee the quality of the steak.
The above is also how I understand it, and I can’t be the only one who has trouble getting medium well instead of medium rare or well done.
I have had this exchange with waiters -
Me: “Medium well - a little pink in the center, but hot all the way thru.”
Waiter: “OK”
Brings back a steak that is red in the center
Me: “Could you cook this a little more? It should be a little pink in the center, but hot all the way thru.”
Waiter: “OK”.
Brings back a steak that is gray all the way thru
Repeat cycle.
And, IMO, the proper response to a waiter who says, “the chef won’t cook it any way but medium rare” is “I hope you can persuade him otherwise, for the sake of your tip.”
The important thing is not what the chef thinks tastes good, it is what I think tastes good. It’s my steak. And if he is going to send something to the table that is not what is described on the menu, I will have something to say to the manager.
I have friends who actually had the chef come out to his table to tell him how he should want his steak done. They wound up leaving without finishing the meal. Correctly, IMO.
Regards,
Shodan
Unless you’re at a top level steakhouse, there’s nothing sophisticated about ordering a steak. It’s on the menu to satisfy those who don’t like “fancy food”. Give me an dish carefully prepared by a trained chef, not a slab of meat that anyone with tongs and a stopwatch could cook properly.
I saw this, and thought it was fascinating. Of course, I am the OP, so I might be the only one still reading. 
Just wanted to add that I think being sophisticated with regards to steak is not knowing how to cook it, but appreciating that a steak at Morton’s tastes better than one from Outback, and that is why you pay twice as much.
A tangent, but related -
My father told me about a blind taste test (of wine, but it speaks to the notion that taste can be objectively analysed) where the lights were such that the color of the wine could not be distinguished.
The wine critics participating did no better than random in distinguishing red wine from white. :eek:
Regards,
Shodan
My mother is the same way.
So who here is gonna argue with Eve, my Mom, and U.S. Grant?
Nice anecdote, but I have to call bullshit on that. The difference between white and red is night and day. For one, white has no tannins, which are pretty damn obvious in reds.
If this anecdote is true, then the people participating could only have been the greenest wine newbies around. They taste nothing alike, but they are both very good in their own right. I loves me red, whites, and roses equally as much.
Reading this made me thing of the movie Big Night with Stanley Tucci and Tony Shaloub. Shaloub was Primo, the chef. Food was a canvas to him. Tucci was Secondo, the younger brother who wanted to make his mark in America. He was more pragmatic about the business. Primo’s cooking was his art. Just as one wouldn’t tell Da Vinci or Monet how to paint, one shouldn’t tell Primo how to cook. Beauty may be in the eye of the beholder, but don’t ask the artist to mar his canvas simply because you have a different vision of beauty than the artist.
Of course, the question then becomes which chefs are artists, and which are simply glorified, pompous hacks producing reproductions for the masses?
I agree with you, pulykamel. Those who appreciate wine can easily tell the difference.
I did, however, see the test Shodan mentions. It was on the Food Channel, if memory serves. They weren’t testing regular wine drinkers. The testees were either non or infrequent wine drinkers. I think a few of the drinkers were of the type “I only drink red” or “I only drink white”, in an effort to break down some preconceived notios about wine.
I was trying to search to see if I could come up with any papers that related to my anecdote and I found a tangentially related one here http://jas.fass.org/cgi/content/full/82/6/1863
Here’s the end report
So, ironically, according to this study the best cuts of meat should be saved for those who are ordering their steaks well-done as they need the extra tenderness.