Tujague

When we were at Schneider's a few weeks ago, they told us they were out and that it had been back-ordered for several weeks. Does anyone know why that might be happening, or if other stores had similar issues? I don't know if that's changed since we were in.

Would Osteria Morini be appropriate? Or Floriana?

To Billie Holiday. Happy 100th, Lady Day.

Mango Tree started brunch service this past weekend, and since the prices seemed reasonable, I thought it might be a good way to check out the place. Maybe, maybe not: the brunch offered me both one of the best and one of the worst dishes that I've had in recent memory. For my starter, I had the "street style 'pork-in-a-bag'," which was pretty much like it sounds: five good-sized skewers of flavorful marinated grilled pork (I couldn't quite place the flavor but it was delicious), served in a plastic bag filled with sticky rice, tied with twine, and served with a sweet-spicy tamarind sauce ($12). If this exemplifies what the kitchen can do here, it invites a return visit. The sauce isn't for heatseekers, but it had a pleasant warmth and a sense of quality. Excellent dish.

On the other hand, the "Thai, American Full English" breakfast was a mixed bag: thai sausage, bacon, 2 wok-fried eggs, grilled portabello and tomatoes, hash browns, and fried bread. The sausage was reminiscent of Filipino longaniza, if a bit more refined, a pair of thick stubby links. Wok-fried eggs went 1-for-2: one still with a liquid center, one with a solid yolk. The hash browns were a 2-inch fried cube, with a center that seemed to be a mix of mashed and shredded potatoes. All of these were acceptable enough, but the fried bread was, well, disgusting. Two half-slices of Texas-cut toast that seemingly had been simply dropped in hot oil and served on top of everything--they tasted like the bread one might use to test whether your frying oil was up to temperature, writ large. I don't know what the chef is thinking with that--it definitely tasted of oil, not butter, and for me was inedible. Offering rice rather than bread--more like a Filipino breakfast--would have been a far better option. I get that they are trying to play with three different traditions here, but it's not as well-thought-out as it sounds. (I should have ordered one of the benedicts, which seemed to be large and have interesting Thai twists to them, but I was a little burned-out on poached eggs and English muffins.)

The Spicy Siam cocktail (chili infused mango rum, mango, lime, thai chili) had a pleasant spice to it, similar in heat to the sauce with the pork skewers. Service was pleasant, but felt slow: even though I was there for just over an hour, it seemed much longer (maybe an effect of the mostly empty room?). And the restaurant is awkward to get to: you go through the lower-level bar, up one floor via stairs or elevator, into a tiny vestibule with the hostess station, then down a longish hallway into the large, second-story room. Very odd. The good stuff was good enough that I'd try it again for lunch or happy hour (dinner seems a bit dear), but probably not for brunch. I'm sure there's pressure to be open for that meal, but they don't yet have a good handle on it; why not just do a weekend lunch with a few extra brunch-like dishes?

Reopened.

I do hope so. It's really about the only independent coffee shop on that side of Capitol Hill that has space to accommodate a small group (I meet with a group of 4 to 8 people each week).

Damn. Didn't they learn anything from Murky Coffee?

On 3/18/2015 at 8:02 PM, DonRocks said:

Black and Orange is now out of business.

The good news: You can still enjoy Black Iron Pizza, BlackSalt, Black Fox, Black Squirrel, Black Whiskey, Black Jack, Harold Black, and Black Rooster Pub.

And now also Orange Anchor.

I stopped into Souk today looking for hot paprika.  They had it among a wall of spices, salts, dried herbs, dried fruits, chocolates, and other delicacies in big glass jars.  2 oz. cost me $9.  I resisted the temptation to buy anything else, but the rum and vanilla canelés ($3.95?, I think) in the pastry case looked gorgeous, as did the scones and buns/rolls.  There was one stuffed bun with (IIRC) prosciutto, mozzarella, and sun-dried tomatoes that I was even more tempted to buy than the canelés.  It's hard to express correctly, but the puff of the dough was enticing.  It was popped up almost like a popover.  Now I'm kicking myself I didn't buy one.

I bought their raspberry pound cake for Valentine's Day, a few days after they opened. It was a bit dense, but still moist and flavorful, and it went beautifully with Talenti's Raspberrys and Cream gelato (which is really wonderful). I agree this is a nice, if a bit pricey, addition to Barracks Row. Between this and The Sweet Lobby, the owners are showing themselves to be talented entrepreneurs with above-average offerings.

I am not sure I would say that Bearnaise emerged from the same 'person' but rather from a food concept LLC. I am pretty sure SM has had very, VERY little to do with the concept, menu, or execution except in an executive producer sense....

I'd give SM a bit more credit; Bearnaise hardly comes across as a "concept," and the menu actually does reflect some of the background that SM has always announced for himself. No, he's not the one who's executing it, but as Don says, he had the insight to hire someone who could do so, and pretty well overall, which is not a small thing. I wonder how we would be talking about it (and him!) if this had been the restaurant he started out with, rather than Good Stuff and We the Pizza, with himself manning the kitchen.

Thanks. My dad was born and raised in Pineville, Louisiana, and he and my mom met during WWII when stationed near Asheville, but no, little of that got into my growing-up dining, outside of pecan pie (mostly the Midwestern standards, which some might call "farm cooking," even though catfish was plentiful if Dad had been a fisherman). Yes, I've been to Table (best pork chop I ever had). I get what you're saying, about food "bubbling up" the economic classes. But still, as you describe it, it sounds as if what started as "soul food" morphs into something more refined and distinct from its roots, which some would define as "southern" cooking. It feels a bit as if the distinction has to with how closely a food stays to its roots--the more "gussied up," the less it seems to deserve the title of "soul" food, at least to us non-Southerners. Or maybe the analogy I am thinking of is how an ethnic cuisine may change when transplanted into a different context, ergo, one might see southern cooking as soul food transplanted into a different economic context. But yes, it makes sense, how "soul" and "Suthrun" aren't necessarily different.

(Edited: Oy, the autocorrect on my iPad!)

Not really.  When you're not too far up the economic ladder you eat what you can afford.  Ergo, pigs ears, pigs feet, souse (you can look it up), chitterlings (chittlins would be the "proper" pronunciation), black, white, or green, it's soul food to some, Suthrun (Southern) to others.

(I put the pronunciations in so you can impress your friends with how Suthrun you are )

So, excuse me if I misunderstand, but there seems to be an equation here between "Southern" and "low-income" that feels off. It seems to me that there is a whole other tradition of cooking that belongs, say, to the plantation mansion or at least to the well-to-do, that most would label as "Southern," but not necessarily as soul food. While I would not elevate them as great examples of anything, where would one place what is served at places like Eatonville or (ugh) Georgia Brown's (or, say, in Asheville, of Tupelo Honey)? I'm not arguing for their quality or authenticity, but I think most would distinguish their offerings more as "Southern" rather than "soul" food.  And isn't low-country cooking its own separate example?

The one and only time I went to Good Stuff, Spike's father was in the front of the house and being brash, obnoxious, and offensive (in my sense of the words; YMMV).*  I didn't find the ordering system to be great, but it wasn't horrible.

I've been to We the Pizza more times than that and have found the service horrible (very uncooperative and surly).  Seems like an institutional issue to me, but I haven't been enough times to draw that conclusion authoritatively.  And I have not been to Bearnaise.

I've found both GS and WTP very off-putting places, and haven't returned in some time. Bearnaise, on the other hand, is so wholly different that you'd probably not guess they emerge from the same person. Which is not to call it great, but the service was pleasant and competent enough, and I would actually consider returning.

Speaking of filthy conditions, the only time I've been to Five Guys was some years ago. to the Georgetown location, and it kind of grossed me out. If that's what people think McDonald's should be, no thanks.

Y'know, I am just trying to accommodate a friend.  I am always confused by requests by LA people about dining in the DC area, and I hate responding to it.  

I hear you. It probably comes down to the misplaced assumptions that people make about DC: (1) that we are in fact a southern city--not; and (2) that we are a majority-black city (not so much anymore): ergo, good and plentiful soul food. With no insult to your friend, who is surely a fine person, these sorts of broad-based assumptions can be a tad racist.

I'm not saying a lobster dish can't be worth $49, but if it contained a single 1 1/4 or 1 1/2-pound-lobster, in shell, thrown atop some Pad Thai, then it's a rip-off. Please let us know how it was prepared. Two nights ago, I paid $22.95 for an entire, (lazily hacked apart with a meat cleaver), stir-fried lobster in Szechuan sauce at Mala Tang, and while I had to do all the meat removal myself, I suspect the cost of ingredients was similar to your $49 dish.

If the $49 price got you shucked lobster meat from two 1 1/4-pound lobsters (or equivalent), then it's well-priced.

I haven't been, but Sietsema's review said the Pad Thai was intended to serve 2-3 people as a main dish. The picture in the magazine showed a whole baked lobster that it appears the server shucks and mixes at the table. I don't know if that ups the value ($49 vs. the earlier $36 price is a big jump indeed, which suggests perhaps a temporary supply issue, as was recently the case with mussels), but it does explain some of the likely thinking behind the price. But the City Center space surely commands high rent, which is probably going to make "value" a relative matter for any place that locates there--or maybe beside the point for the primary audience they're aiming for. My guess is that Soi 38, Little Serow, et al. probably aren't the competition they have in sight but more their neighbors in that location, or other nearby restaurants in a similar price range, not just other Thai or Asian places--and for some people, that prestige factor is what matters, like it or not.

1957-1975: Peterson, a tiny NW Iowa town in the Little Sioux River valley, founded by my maternal great-great grandparents. Dad was a native of Pineville, Louisiana.

1975-76: Waverly, Iowa

1976-79: Northfield, Minnesota

1979-1986, 1987-98: In and around the Twin Cities: St. Paul, Fridley, Roseville, St. AnthonyPark/Lauderdale, Falcon Heights.

1985-86: Glasgow, Montana

1998-99: Rockville, MD

1999-present: Capitol Hill

This confuses me. Le Chat Noir is in Tenleytown, not Van Ness. The movie theatre that used to be nearby was not next to it, but the next block down, and was the Outer Circle 1 and 2, and not an independent cinema, although it was mostly programmed as an "art house". There used to be some crappy little multiplexes in Van Ness, but never an independent that I can recall. The Outer Circle was next to the venerable Round Table restaurant on Wisconsin. Both buildings were eventually torn down and replaced by a bank and its parking lot. Such is progress.

That's right; I remember the Hank Greenberg movie played there for some time. I only went to the West End once, in its earlier incarnation, and I was appalled by the sightlines, not to mention a tiny screen that some home theaters put to shame. But I also had some great times at the Visions theater, not least taking Bob's Filipino mother to see a documentary on Imelda Marcos. The New America Foundation also sponsored some good pre-release screenings there, including "Thirteen." For now, I'm chomping at the bit for the National Gallery of Art's theater to reopen.

To Malcolm Boyd, activist, author, and one of the earliest Episcopal priest to come out as gay. GLBTQ people--both Christian and otherwise--owe him a debt of gratitude for his courage and grace when being openly gay--and Christian, to boot--was still nearly unthinkable.

And to John Steinbruck, former pastor of Luther Place Memorial Church here in DC, a founder of Lutheran Volunteer Corps, and of N Street Village, which pioneered ministry with the homeless back in the 1970s. The changes we see now along the 14th Street corridor are perhaps unimaginable without the fierce commitment of this man to justice and care for the most vulnerable, particularly women. Indeed, everyone who's enjoying a drink along that street tonight or enjoying their shiny new apartments should lift a glass in his honor--and perhaps think for a second of those nearby who could never dream of spending $12+ for a craft cocktail or living in a $3,000-a-month apartment.

Fast casual is so yesterday. Here's the next big trend in dining.

Today I went to LPQ for only the third time: I've been to the Capitol Hill location once before for coffee, and to the Palisades (?) once for lunch--not really impressed but didn't have enough food to form an impression. Since Pound wasn't open this morning because of snow, I met with my usual Tuesday group here. Service was slow, but that was partly because they only had one server, and the manager was also trying to fill in at table waiting (apparently Peregrine was also closed). Coffee is okay, though I find the small pots don't keep it particularly hot or provide good value. But the avocado toast is really pretty terrific here--mashed avocado with slices on top, nicely garnished with chia seeds, a citrus vinaigrette, slices of chioggia beets, and carrot strips--if a bit expensive at $9.95 for four good-sized slices. Not planning to rush back, but if I did find myself there for breakfast, I wouldn't hesitate to order that again.

(Another off-putting note: A boor from another table hovered over me while slathering his bread with the various spreads on the table, without saying excuse me or anything. What the hell is wrong with people?)

To Lesley Gore. It's my party, and I'll cry if I want to.

So, have both learned more and thought a bit more about this in the last few days. And, have changed my mind some as a result.

Still not overly animated about what Williams did. Life's too short for that and think it different than if he had a) lied about some heroic action he took or misrepresented his resume credentials to get a job or c) impugned servicemembers or service generally and stuff like that.

But, I now agree he clearly lied badly and chronically. To me, it just reflects very poorly on him, his insecurity, arrogance or whatever. I don't ever watch him but assume he is a good anchor in many ways so easy for me to just defer to NBC on the issue of whether he should be terminated. That's a pure business decision for them I'm sure. They'll make a determination soon as to whether the negative publicity becomes too much a liability for them. I just don't have a strong view on it morally or ethically.

The thing I would still disagree with--and this is a personal view of course--is the idea that his lies are some huge affront to servicemembers and vets. Don't see that at all. What he did is sad; pitiful even. But, my gosh, service members were spit upon after Vietnam and roundly criticized as warmongers and worse up to and including the current day. Some perpetrators have fabricated their own military or war credentials. Those are the bigger "affronts" imho.

All said, just not worth the stress, energy and time to sweat the stuff you can't control anyway.

I agree with this, particularly since there is also now evidence that Williams exaggerated his experiences in New Orleans as well. But I don't see Williams's sin as skewing the news in a way that ideologically skewed cable news organizations do day in, day out, which I think does do damage to the body politic, regardless of which side they tend toward. Even more, I regard Williams as sort of an anachronism in today's media world--the days of the network news anchor being the most "trusted man in America" are passing quickly, and his network competitors have hardly his public profile. I see him as the last of a breed in a business that is either dying or morphing rapidly into something else. Yes, there will be others, like Lester Holt, Scott Pelley, etc., who play that role. But the credibility of news organizations is no longer built around this "great man" concept. Millennials, by and large, don't pay attention to the news in the way that preceding generations did, or, at least, consume it in the same way. His future depends in large part on the degree to which NBC thinks it can not just find a replacement (Holt), but move into a wholly other way of doing its news business that is can draw in new audiences rather than just struggle to retain the old, many of whom, like myself, are moving away as well.

Now we're getting political (we actually already got political in Post #2 and #3 - I have absolutely no idea what Brian Williams' politics are, and don't care). Your more interesting point of "the mainstream media competing for attention" is, in my view, relevant to the story.

My aim wasn't to make this political, but more to note how the media shapes our politics--it's all pretty much inseparable, in my view. The competition for attention shapes political perceptions by giving particular emphasis or perspective on any certain story, whether or not it is inherently political. Simply entering a war zone in a politically disputed conflict, any journalist is going to, on some level, shape political opinion. How we perceive or understand our wars is in large part due to the journalistic coverage. So, Brian Williams talking about being under enemy fire, true or not, is probably going to do more to persuade many of the righteousness of a cause rather than to give people pause about its possible follies. It's not just self-aggrandizing, it undergirds a perspective that the media has some competitive stake in perpetuating. The issue isn't Brian Williams's or anyone's personal politics; it's what grabs the ratings, so the bigger issue it seems, is cynicism. And yes, I expressed my political views, but that didn't really change my larger point.

I suspect that Williams got caught in the contemporary talk-show trap of being compelled to appear on Letterman, Leno, Fallon, et al., and to tell a "good story," egged on by whatever host is interviewing him, in order to boost ratings and promote the news division. It was dumb, but he wasn't necessarily alone in this. The talk shows need the audiences as much as the news shows, and audiences suspend credulity in the name of being entertained, which we mistake with being informed.

Or, to go out farther, I don't understand why this is somehow more offensive than the ways in which the mainstream media was either co-opted into or willingly participated in promoting the wars of the past 14 years (or longer). Focusing on one man's misrepresentations of his own peril seems like small potatoes to the misrepresentations of the threats to the US from Iraq and other Middle Eastern countries that the networks pummeled us with constantly. If you want to go after Brian Williams for something, go after him for that, but he shouldn't be a scapegoat for a larger journalistic sin. That's not to defend his actions, but to place them within a broader context of the mainstream media competing for attention, particularly in an age of celebrity journalism, at the expense of the public good. (And, yes, even despite his prevarications, props to all journalists who venture into war zones, which too often has been at the cost of their lives, regardless of motivation.)

Then again, memory is wonky, especially under stressful situations. But if this doesn't bother me as much as some, it's probably because I give such little credence to network and cable news anymore, geared as they are toward shaping stories so as to gain maximum eyes and ears for as long as possible--and taking aim at those who don't cooperate in that goal--or focusing on fluff (Prince George's latest boo-boo). For me, Williams is less offensive on that level than many of his colleagues and peers, and his personal credibility is no worse than the entire enterprise in which he's engaged.