Comments on: Ingredients, Odyssey and Foie Gras - Three New Cookbooks http://wellfed.net/2008/05/02/ingredients-odyssey-and-foie-gras-three-new-cookbooks/ A network of 15 food and wine related sites. Mon, 08 Sep 2008 10:42:26 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.0.4 by: Sandy http://wellfed.net/2008/05/02/ingredients-odyssey-and-foie-gras-three-new-cookbooks/#comment-194685 Mon, 12 May 2008 03:00:57 +0000 http://wellfed.net/2008/05/02/ingredients-odyssey-and-foie-gras-three-new-cookbooks/#comment-194685 Dear Will, In response to your comment, I would like to accept responsibility for the "eminently modifiable" bad English. As I recall, Andrew's original text read "imminently," and I, as his editor on the Paper Palate site, misread this to mean "ready to take place," i.e., "readily" as opposed to the suggested "eminently, e.g., "to a high degree." So, on this one, the fault is mine. Thanks for reading, Sandy Dear Will,

In response to your comment, I would like to accept responsibility for the “eminently modifiable” bad English. As I recall, Andrew’s original text read “imminently,” and I, as his editor on the Paper Palate site, misread this to mean “ready to take place,” i.e., “readily” as opposed to the suggested “eminently, e.g., “to a high degree.” So, on this one, the fault is mine.
Thanks for reading,
Sandy

]]> by: Will http://wellfed.net/2008/05/02/ingredients-odyssey-and-foie-gras-three-new-cookbooks/#comment-191784 Wed, 07 May 2008 13:16:21 +0000 http://wellfed.net/2008/05/02/ingredients-odyssey-and-foie-gras-three-new-cookbooks/#comment-191784 Rarely have I read such complete tosh about how to judge a cook book (by its pictures). Did history just leave the building? Does Elizabeth David just not get a look in because there are insufficient oil sprayed pictures in it? And then in the very next breath the reviewer utters the immortal and brilliantly paradoxical: "with such delicious !sounding! dishes". The bad English continues: "eminently modifiable" is I think more correct, unless of course you meant the iminence of modifications is the key thing..There are then more mixed up tenses - you are sure the recipes are good (i.e. you have not cooked one yet) and then rate the lamb...so you have used it then and the recipe is good. A good review would have focussed on the achievability of the recipes, the clarity of explanation and method for the home chef. Rarely have I read such complete tosh about how to judge a cook book (by its pictures). Did history just leave the building? Does Elizabeth David just not get a look in because there are insufficient oil sprayed pictures in it? And then in the very next breath the reviewer utters the immortal and brilliantly paradoxical: “with such delicious !sounding! dishes”. The bad English continues: “eminently modifiable” is I think more correct, unless of course you meant the iminence of modifications is the key thing..There are then more mixed up tenses - you are sure the recipes are good (i.e. you have not cooked one yet) and then rate the lamb…so you have used it then and the recipe is good. A good review would have focussed on the achievability of the recipes, the clarity of explanation and method for the home chef.

]]>