Hey, they got free smells!
It is about respecting food and the way that it is prepared. It is about enjoying the fact that food can be art. It is talking to your tablemates about the plays on everyday food that the chef created. It is about enjoying dining. And by dining I mean savoring the food, enjoying a drink and talking with your companions. If you want the most calories for your dollar then fine dining isn’t for you. Enjoy Applebees, Chilis or the like while wolfing down food that you think is a bargain. For me, dining is an experience in new tastes, presentations and company.
Well, obviously.
But don’t try to tell me that if someone like Wiley Dufresne or Thomas Keller did offer a “play” on wings, or potato skins, or grilled cheese, or any other comfort type food, a) it’d cost significantly more than if you were to get the item at a “non-gourmet” restaurant, and b) the portion would very likely be much smaller than what you’d get at a more casual eatery. In essence, it’d be like spending $450 on a Michael Kors purse vs. spending $20 on an equally sized, just as durable purse from Target. That was my whole point.
Dude, read post #23. And relax a little.
Or instead, I’ll just drive down to my local taqueria, and get a taco de lengua, a taco de birria, and a taco de tripa (or maybe even a taco de cabeza). I’ll spend about $7.00 including the drink, and I’ll have just tasted wonderfully exotic, big, bold flavors, masterfully prepared by the people in the kitchen. And I won’t have to get dressed up; I won’t have some fussy aesthete suggesting what kind of wine would best go with my dinner; and I won’t have to deal with stuffiness or snobbery of any kind.
Don’t get me wrong, fine dining does have its place. That said, the Emperor’s New Clothes comment above was absolutely spot on. And keturah, your implication that all dining that isn’t pretentious and “fine” is equivalent to Applebee’s is just hogwash.
Until your taqueria serves tacos de foie gras, it ain’t gourmet.
Which is more gourmet?
- A foodie appreciating cheap-but-authentic-and-tasty local food that is in no way presented as “gourmet.”
OR
- An over-the-top gastronomic palace that produces a poor menu - boring, uninspired and poortly executed plate to plate - but clearly aspiring to be a gourmet location?
Who’s role in defining “gourmet” matters more? The chef/restaurant, or the eater? What matters more about the food - how it is prepared? Or how it is perceived?
I heard someone argue that “gourmet” belongs in a yet-unnamed class of words whose presence implies the absence of what it is supposed to imply. In other words, if it’s described as “gourmet”, it isn’t. (Other such words were “bargain” and “value”.)
It’s a fairly useless term. I’d define it as “food that someone gave a damn about”, but since there is probably a food lab full of people who spend their lives making Cheetos taste better, even that definition is too broad.
On the rare occasions that I think of it at all, “gourmet” implies to me “food as entertainment or art” as opposed to “food as fuel.” I was taught years ago to not play with my food.
To me “gourmet” means high-quality food, careflly prepared.
It does NOT mean weird and exotic foods-most of which are not worth the expense.
For example, the Chinese gourmets go crazy over “bech de mer” (sea cucmber)…to me, it tastes like dried up pork rinds. Or ytruffles-over $25/ ounce-bt basically a strong flavored mshroom.
So it means what *you *want it to mean. Got it. 
I think “gourmet” is a horrible word. Too many negative connotations, it suggests to me something that is over-priced and over-prepared. A chef that is trying too hard and charging too much.
I truly believe the best foods are simple, “peasant” foods. Good quality raw materials prepared simply will trounce pretentious attempts at fine cuisine any day. If we all think back to the most memorable things we have eaten I reckon they will be simple affairs…some of mine would be
>A free range egg removed 10 minutes earlier from under a chicken roosting in a hay-baler, perfectly boiled. (My auntie’s farm in Weardale - cost - £0.00)
>6 seared cubes of steak presented with mashed radish and a side plate of a dozen whitebait (back street restaurant, Tokyo - cost £10.00)
>half-dozen oysters taken from the Etang de Thau that morning (Bouzigues, France - cost - £5.00)
“Gourmet” suggest someone who is trying to deliver the above experiences, rather substandardly, with an inflated price tag.
If that was your point, you should have made it like that. Nobody is going to argue with that.
Sorry. I thought my original utilization of hyperbole was more obvious. I guess it wasn’t quite.
I have to disagree that “gourmet” is the term for over-priced, over-prepared fare.
To me, gourmet is quality ingredients prepared in an interesting, different manner.
My grandmom can cook up a tuna casserole that is stellar in it’s flavor, but it is canned tuna and common ingredients. While excellent, neither I nor her would consider it gourmet.
Quality of the ingredients to me makes something gourmet or special, or, deliberately taking a poor quality ingredient and transforming it into something special. That is where knowledge and technique come into play.
dbx820, I can totally get behind that definition. Well said.
I sort of agree about the quality of the ingredients, though “different” and “interesting” are concepts often abused. My point was more about the use of the term itself. If you have to say “gourmet” somewhere in you menu or literature it is something of a red flag to me.
I don’t see any conflict here. If your taqueria is really as masterful as you say, and you approach it it as keturah suggests, with respect and appreciation for the quality, that’s as gourmet as anything.
The first, of course, if approached properly. Not every meal there may produce a gourmet experience, but it’s certain that none at the second will.
Both preparation and perception (or at least the capacity for the perception) are essential. A lack on either side makes the experience unachievable.
Ah - so basically, “gourmet” is defined similarly to “pornography” - the preparer may or may not intend it, but the consumer knows it when he/she sees it.
Got it.