On Sunday, May 8, 2011 1:33:51 PM UTC-4, wrote:

> Food Network started heading downhill years ago when they cancelled
> Ready, Set, Cook, accelerated their decline with the American Iron
> Chef, and bottomed out about two years ago. They have nothing that
> we'll watch any more.


Interesting topic beyond food, the 24/7 tv channel, for ANYTHING. The History Channel plays all sorts of stuff not related to history. But the reality is they can always say that everything is history. Well, so too is everything food. Maybe one day you turn on the Food Channel to find a pack of wolves chasing down a deer and chomping it to shreds for what seems like forever, to the point where you wonder if you might be on the wrong channel. Nope, it's the Food Network alright, showing us the history of food. All the channels are inner related. And why not? Most are inundated with infomercials from 2 to 8 in the morning. I'm not complaining. Sometimes the infomercials are an improvement on the shows. Let's be honest, there is only so much they can show us about cooking. And if they teach too well they will have nothing left to sell. Most of the food I see on those shows is pretentious stuff with pretentious ingredients most viewers don't have on hand, and of course the prep work and clean up is always conveniently left unseen. I enjoy the network now and then though.

TJ

An improvement on Pawoolah Deeeeeeeeeeen, Barfeoot Cowtessa, Semi-Homemade, et.al.?

Poppycock!

I'll watch some of the stuff. Chopped is sill funny, ICA is another death knell I'll watch once a month when there's not much on Sunday night.

Can't dedicate to any one show, though, like I do America's Test Kitchen.

In article >, wrote:
wrote:
>>On Monday, April 24, 2006 12:19:29 PM UTC-4, Phillip wrote:

>>>I have some comments about the Food Network that I'd like to share. I
>>>would just like to say that I've been watching Food Network for many,
>>>many years now along with family and friends. Lately we've all been in
>>>agreement that Food Network has really been lacking the diversity of shows
>>>it has. Also, some of the personalities that have their own shows really
>>>irritate me. For instance, I like Rachel Ray. She's a good chef, but do
>>>we really need to see her 6 times a day? And Ina Garten. That woman has
>>>no personality at all! My wife and I could fall asleep watching her show.
>>>Why doesn't Food Network consider removing some of these repetitive
>>>programs, and removing very "blah" hosts and replacing it with some fresh
>>>blood? For instance, I would love to see a show on Food Network that
>>>focuses on Asian cuisine. I think that's a very huge segment that could be
>>>tapped into. There just needs to be more diversity on this network in my
>>>opinion.
>>
>>Has the Food Network gone downhill? Not sure there is a mountain big
>>enough to describe this fall. What a bunch of egomaniac clowns! I cant
>>say enough horrible things about this network. There are only a few
>>shows that I still enjoy watching, but the BS competitions and games are
>>imo...ridiculous. The cupcakes and sweets showcased throughout the holidays
>>were beyond gross. I think I'm down to Giada, Ina and Ton of Butter in
>>Savannah (only because I like seeing her home and making fun of her sons).
>>Never could stand Sandra Ho Made from day one. What a phoney! Surely there
>>are enough qualifed people to intoduce some new quality programming. I do
>>not appreciate Cindy Crawford pimping her crap in the morning. How lazy and
>>cheap can they be?
>
>Over the past 12-18 months my viewing of this channel has gone own about 50%.
>I dislike the shows that are all "personality and chat" and light on the
>cooking technique and education and interesting recipies. I would love to see
>more shows bout technique and recipies. Cook's Country and America's test
>kitchen are great shows but play on my local PBS station. I did watch one of
>Tricia Yearwoods shows and, surprisingly, thought it was good and the recipies
>interesting. I'll catch another show. I watched some of the popular pioneer
>woman shoes and most of the recipies were things I already did or could find
>in my church league cookbooks - not a lot of new stuff but a lot of silly
>comments to the camera. I wish Sara moulton had a show again. As long as food
>network keeps stressing personality over food I think it is producing shows
>at a lower level than it could. I get that viewers won't watch someone with a
>bad personality, but the chef shouldn't overshadow the show content which
>should be about recipies, food and educating viewers. I really don't want to
>hear a lot about the chef's personal stories.

I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking channels on
PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor production and the chef
might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of view" -- but it was actual
cooking. I learned to cook watching Earl Peyroux on our local PBS station (at
13 I thought I was a cooking rockstar when I served rice in a ring mold!!...he
was fond of rice in a ring mold), Lidia's Italy and Great Cooks and Nathalie
Dupree. Now that I'm an accomplished cook myself, I'm difficult to impress, but
I'm still drawn to shows that feature chefs who clearly know what they're doing
and are just comfortable being filmed just going about the business of cooking.
That's comfort watching for me. I don't need a gimmick or a point of view. I
hate the obligatory tasting shots...Like the host is going to take a bite and
then do a spit take? (Actually I might watch a show like that.) With this FN
lineup, it's been ages since I've watched.

In article >, dude
wrote:
>Goro > wrote:
>> On May 8, 10:33 am, wrote:
>>> On Sun, 08 May 2011 10:41:53 -0500, (Ubiquitous)
>>> wrote:

>>>> Really, Food Network?
>>>
>>> Food Network started heading downhill years ago when they cancelled
>>> Ready, Set, Cook, accelerated their decline with the American Iron
>>> Chef, and bottomed out about two years ago. They have nothing that
>>> we'll watch any more.
>>>
>>> The Cooking Channel has picked up some overlooked actual cooking
>>> content, but they'll undoubtedly follow the same route. 8;(
>>
>> I thought they basically lost it when they got rid of Sara Moulton's
>> show. My favorite cooking shows are on PBS. I haven't watched Food
>> Network in years.
>>
>> -goro-
>
>I agree... Even Alton Brown seems barely noticeable.

I've seen promos for Cuthroat Kitchen, which Alton Brown hosts.
Contestants get $25k to buy obstacles for their opponents and the winner
gets to keep the cash left in their stash. Awareness of this (I won't be
watching) kinda cancels out the last of my good feelings for Alton left
over from Good Eats. Good feelings for FN were gone a long time ago.

On Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:07:34 PM UTC-5, Berenice Ibarra wrote:
>
> I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking channels on
> PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor production and the chef
> might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of view" -- but it was actual
> cooking. I learned to cook watching Earl Peyroux on our local PBS station (at
> 13 I thought I was a cooking rockstar when I served rice in a ring mold!!...he
> was fond of rice in a ring mold), Lidia's Italy and Great Cooks and Nathalie
> Dupree. Now that I'm an accomplished cook myself, I'm difficult to impress, but
> I'm still drawn to shows that feature chefs who clearly know what they're doing
> and are just comfortable being filmed just going about the business of cooking.
> That's comfort watching for me. I don't need a gimmick or a point of view. I
> hate the obligatory tasting shots...Like the host is going to take a bite and
> then do a spit take? (Actually I might watch a show like that.) With this FN
> lineup, it's been ages since I've watched.

What would be fun to watch is a comedy show featuring a
chef where everything went wrong except the final result.
That would be much more entertaining than what is on now.

There used to be a comedy show from England called "Chef!"
with Lenny Henry which was very entertaining. Anyone here
watched it?

But seriously, I do agree, a show that teaches cooking is
much better than what is being shown now. Today's
programming is at the level of game shows and soap operas.

http://www.richardfisher.com

On 2013-11-15 3:53 PM, Helpful person wrote:
> On Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:07:34 PM UTC-5, Berenice Ibarra wrote:
>>
>> I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking channels on
>> PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor production and the chef
>> might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of view" -- but it was actual
>> cooking. I learned to cook watching Earl Peyroux on our local PBS station (at
>> 13 I thought I was a cooking rockstar when I served rice in a ring mold!!...he
>> was fond of rice in a ring mold), Lidia's Italy and Great Cooks and Nathalie
>> Dupree. Now that I'm an accomplished cook myself, I'm difficult to impress, but
>> I'm still drawn to shows that feature chefs who clearly know what they're doing
>> and are just comfortable being filmed just going about the business of cooking.
>> That's comfort watching for me. I don't need a gimmick or a point of view. I
>> hate the obligatory tasting shots...Like the host is going to take a bite and
>> then do a spit take? (Actually I might watch a show like that.) With this FN
>> lineup, it's been ages since I've watched.
>
> What would be fun to watch is a comedy show featuring a
> chef where everything went wrong except the final result.
> That would be much more entertaining than what is on now.
>
> There used to be a comedy show from England called "Chef!"
> with Lenny Henry which was very entertaining. Anyone here
> watched it?

I watched it for a while.

>
> But seriously, I do agree, a show that teaches cooking is
> much better than what is being shown now. Today's
> programming is at the level of game shows and soap operas.
>


It has pretty much descended into the realm of culinary "reality" TV
with all the stupid competitions. It's pretty sad when it gets to the
point where endless repeats of Diners Drive-ins and Dives is the best
they have to offer.

On 11/15/13 3:53 PM, Helpful person wrote:

> There used to be a comedy show from England called "Chef!"
> with Lenny Henry which was very entertaining. Anyone here
> watched it?

Yes, we watched all the episodes when it debuted in the US. That and Two
Fat Ladies were our best UK imports, IMO.

> But seriously, I do agree, a show that teaches cooking is
> much better than what is being shown now. Today's
> programming is at the level of game shows and soap operas.

Yes, the Food Network has been headed downhill since the demise of
Ready, Set, Cook. The advent of Iron Chef America just announced FC's
impending death. Diners, Drive-ins, and Dives was the funeral.

we just don't watch FC at all any more. We have the Cooking Channel, and
PBS, and Recipe TV, which is interesting.

-- Larry

"Berenice Ibarra" > wrote in message
news:16dc01cee236$07bf1e00$173d5a00$@com...

> I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking
> channels on
> PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor production and the
> chef
> might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of view" -- but it was actual
> cooking. I learned to cook watching Earl Peyroux on our local PBS station
> (at
> 13 I thought I was a cooking rockstar when I served rice in a ring
> mold!!...he
> was fond of rice in a ring mold), Lidia's Italy and Great Cooks and
> Nathalie
> Dupree. Now that I'm an accomplished cook myself, I'm difficult to
> impress, but
> I'm still drawn to shows that feature chefs who clearly know what they're
> doing
> and are just comfortable being filmed just going about the business of
> cooking.
> That's comfort watching for me. I don't need a gimmick or a point of view.
> I
> hate the obligatory tasting shots...Like the host is going to take a bite
> and
> then do a spit take? (Actually I might watch a show like that.) With this
> FN
> lineup, it's been ages since I've watched.

Jacques Pepin is still my favorite and I will watch reruns of him again and
again. One of his shows that aired some years ago featured him and often
his daughter making things out of leftovers in the fridge. I can't tell you
how many different omelets he made from leftovers. I would be like... An
omelet again!? And yet I would be glued to the set. He is just appealing.

"Omar Galanti" > wrote in message
...
> In article >, dude
> wrote:
>>Goro > wrote:
>>> On May 8, 10:33 am, wrote:
>>>> On Sun, 08 May 2011 10:41:53 -0500, (Ubiquitous)
>>>> wrote:
>
>>>>> Really, Food Network?
>>>>
>>>> Food Network started heading downhill years ago when they cancelled
>>>> Ready, Set, Cook, accelerated their decline with the American Iron
>>>> Chef, and bottomed out about two years ago. They have nothing that
>>>> we'll watch any more.
>>>>
>>>> The Cooking Channel has picked up some overlooked actual cooking
>>>> content, but they'll undoubtedly follow the same route. 8;(
>>>
>>> I thought they basically lost it when they got rid of Sara Moulton's
>>> show. My favorite cooking shows are on PBS. I haven't watched Food
>>> Network in years.
>>>
>>> -goro-
>>
>>I agree... Even Alton Brown seems barely noticeable.
>
> I've seen promos for Cuthroat Kitchen, which Alton Brown hosts.
> Contestants get $25k to buy obstacles for their opponents and the winner
> gets to keep the cash left in their stash. Awareness of this (I won't be
> watching) kinda cancels out the last of my good feelings for Alton left
> over from Good Eats. Good feelings for FN were gone a long time ago.

Alton is just totally wasted on that show. I mean his talents are wasted.
They could have put anyone in his position. And although I keep watching
the show each week, the premise is just silly. Get four people who are full
of themselves and usually also obnoxious.

They then pick out either the prime ingredients or perhaps forget one but
none of that matters because of all the stupid stuff they do to each other
for a bidded on fee. Like making one person use only kid's scissors to cut
up ingredients or cooking with a blow torch to losing some prime
ingredients.

To me it is less about cooking and more about stupidity.

"Helpful person" > wrote in message
...
> On Thursday, November 14, 2013 2:07:34 PM UTC-5, Berenice Ibarra wrote:
>>
>> I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking
>> channels on
>> PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor production and the
>> chef
>> might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of view" -- but it was actual
>> cooking. I learned to cook watching Earl Peyroux on our local PBS
>> station (at
>> 13 I thought I was a cooking rockstar when I served rice in a ring
>> mold!!...he
>> was fond of rice in a ring mold), Lidia's Italy and Great Cooks and
>> Nathalie
>> Dupree. Now that I'm an accomplished cook myself, I'm difficult to
>> impress, but
>> I'm still drawn to shows that feature chefs who clearly know what they're
>> doing
>> and are just comfortable being filmed just going about the business of
>> cooking.
>> That's comfort watching for me. I don't need a gimmick or a point of
>> view. I
>> hate the obligatory tasting shots...Like the host is going to take a bite
>> and
>> then do a spit take? (Actually I might watch a show like that.) With
>> this FN
>> lineup, it's been ages since I've watched.
>
> What would be fun to watch is a comedy show featuring a
> chef where everything went wrong except the final result.
> That would be much more entertaining than what is on now.
>
> There used to be a comedy show from England called "Chef!"
> with Lenny Henry which was very entertaining. Anyone here
> watched it?

Was he the black guy with the wife? If so, yes. I liked it. Alas we are
not getting any good shows now on BBC American. Don't think I have watched
that channel in years.
>
> But seriously, I do agree, a show that teaches cooking is
> much better than what is being shown now. Today's
> programming is at the level of game shows and soap operas.

Very true. And I really don't want to see another "war" show. Cupcakes are
old hat and nobody cares about your sugar creations.

"Dave Smith" > wrote in message
...

> It has pretty much descended into the realm of culinary "reality" TV with
> all the stupid competitions. It's pretty sad when it gets to the point
> where endless repeats of Diners Drive-ins and Dives is the best they have
> to offer.

That show is on all the time now. I don't need it. I have a husband. If I
want to see a guy eat a big cheeseburger, I'll watch him!

"pltrgyst" > wrote in message
...
> On 11/15/13 3:53 PM, Helpful person wrote:
>
>> There used to be a comedy show from England called "Chef!"
>> with Lenny Henry which was very entertaining. Anyone here
>> watched it?
>
> Yes, we watched all the episodes when it debuted in the US. That and Two
> Fat Ladies were our best UK imports, IMO.
>
>> But seriously, I do agree, a show that teaches cooking is
>> much better than what is being shown now. Today's
>> programming is at the level of game shows and soap operas.
>
> Yes, the Food Network has been headed downhill since the demise of Ready,
> Set, Cook. The advent of Iron Chef America just announced FC's impending
> death. Diners, Drive-ins, and Dives was the funeral.
>
> we just don't watch FC at all any more. We have the Cooking Channel, and
> PBS, and Recipe TV, which is interesting.

What is Recipe TV? I don't think we have that here. I did get an automated
call about them changing some of our cable lineup but I can't remember what
all was said.

wrote:

>I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking channels on
>PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor production and the chef
>might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of view" -- but it was actual
>cooking.

But maybe the reason why FN sucks is because many people who watch TV watch for
the entertainment and not because they want to learn something. It seems that
recently I've run into so many people who can't cook. Maybe FN thought,
incorrectly of course, that since so many people can't cook today, they decided
to NOT focus on cooking and more on lifestyle, in order to get that audience.
But what they don't get is that there are a million "lifestyle" shows out here
so if someone's looking for a lifestyle show, they don't need to go to FN to get
it.

On Friday, November 15, 2013 11:36:16 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> "Helpful person" wrote in message
>
> > There used to be a comedy show from England called "Chef!"
> > with Lenny Henry which was very entertaining. Anyone here
> > watched it?
>
> Was he the black guy with the wife? If so, yes. I liked it. Alas we are
> not getting any good shows now on BBC American. Don't think I have watched
> that channel in years.
>
Yes, that's the one. My favorite episode was when
he went to Lyon for a premier cooking contest.
All the ingredients had to come from his own
country. It was hilarious trying to find
drinkable English wine (in England). It was even
funnier when it got stolen. He was going from
wine shop to wine shop (in France) asking for
English wine!

http://www.richardfisher.com

On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 12:53:43 -0800 (PST), Helpful person
> wrote:

> On Friday, November 15, 2013 11:36:16 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> > "Helpful person" wrote in message
> >
> > > There used to be a comedy show from England called "Chef!"
> > > with Lenny Henry which was very entertaining. Anyone here
> > > watched it?
> >
> > Was he the black guy with the wife? If so, yes. I liked it. Alas we are
> > not getting any good shows now on BBC American. Don't think I have watched
> > that channel in years.
> >
> Yes, that's the one. My favorite episode was when
> he went to Lyon for a premier cooking contest.
> All the ingredients had to come from his own
> country. It was hilarious trying to find
> drinkable English wine (in England). It was even
> funnier when it got stolen. He was going from
> wine shop to wine shop (in France) asking for
> English wine!
>
That does sound funny, but just an FYI - there is very drinkable
English wine that is grown and produced in England. I know what I
like and I found some when I visited... beer and pubs were my focus at
that point, so I didn't drink much - but for people who prefer wine as
their spirit of choice, it was better than just passable.


--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Monday, November 18, 2013 4:29:41 PM UTC-5, sf wrote:
>
> That does sound funny, but just an FYI - there is very drinkable
> English wine that is grown and produced in England. I know what I
> like and I found some when I visited... beer and pubs were my focus at
> that point, so I didn't drink much - but for people who prefer wine as
> their spirit of choice, it was better than just passable.
>
Speaking as an Englishman I don't believe you.
You'll next be telling me that Japaneses "scotch"
is drinkable.

http://www.richardfisher.com

Steve wrote:

> On Sat, 16 Nov 2013 01:20:21 -0500 (EST), Celene Hurdle wrote:
>
>
>
> <snip>
>
>
>
> Two more sock puppets for the mindless troll known as "Ubiquitous",
>
> 'Celene Hurdle' and 'clair pinger'. Bringing the grand total to 6 in
>
> the past 2 weeks.
>
>
>
> Loser.


Yeah, the troll names are kinda "obvious"...


--
Best
Greg

In article >,
says...
>
> On Monday, November 18, 2013 4:29:41 PM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> >
> > That does sound funny, but just an FYI - there is very drinkable
> > English wine that is grown and produced in England. I know what I
> > like and I found some when I visited... beer and pubs were my focus at
> > that point, so I didn't drink much - but for people who prefer wine as
> > their spirit of choice, it was better than just passable.
> >
> Speaking as an Englishman I don't believe you.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23008300

Janet UK

On Mon, 18 Nov 2013 13:35:53 -0800 (PST), Helpful person
> wrote:

> On Monday, November 18, 2013 4:29:41 PM UTC-5, sf wrote:
> >
> > That does sound funny, but just an FYI - there is very drinkable
> > English wine that is grown and produced in England. I know what I
> > like and I found some when I visited... beer and pubs were my focus at
> > that point, so I didn't drink much - but for people who prefer wine as
> > their spirit of choice, it was better than just passable.
> >
> Speaking as an Englishman I don't believe you.
> You'll next be telling me that Japaneses "scotch"
> is drinkable.
>
LOL! I was surprised too. I guess global warming has its benefits
after all.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Monday, November 18, 2013 4:47:47 PM UTC-5, Janet wrote:
> In article >,
> > On Monday, November 18, 2013 4:29:41 PM UTC-5, sf wrote:
>
> > > That does sound funny, but just an FYI - there is very drinkable
> > > English wine that is grown and produced in England. I know what I
> > > like and I found some when I visited... beer and pubs were my focus at
> > > that point, so I didn't drink much - but for people who prefer wine as
> > > their spirit of choice, it was better than just passable.
>
> > Speaking as an Englishman I don't believe you.
>
> http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/magazine-23008300
>
I still don't believe you. It's a bit like the Californians believing
their wine compares favorably with the French. No matter what they
think, price for price, the French wine is miles ahead. Anyone who has
traveled in both places will understand.

Anyone want to buy London Bridge?

http://www.richardfisher.com

"Celene Hurdle" > wrote in message
...
> wrote:
>
>>I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking
>>channels on
>>PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor production and the
>>chef
>>might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of view" -- but it was actual
>>cooking.
>
> But maybe the reason why FN sucks is because many people who watch TV
> watch for
> the entertainment and not because they want to learn something. It seems
> that
> recently I've run into so many people who can't cook. Maybe FN thought,
> incorrectly of course, that since so many people can't cook today, they
> decided
> to NOT focus on cooking and more on lifestyle, in order to get that
> audience.
> But what they don't get is that there are a million "lifestyle" shows out
> here
> so if someone's looking for a lifestyle show, they don't need to go to FN
> to get
> it.

Where my dad lives, most of the guys watch FN. Turns out that they were all
chefs at some point in their lives. They don't watch it because they need
to learn. They watch because they like to see people doing what they wish
they could be doing.

"Helpful person" > wrote in message
...
> On Friday, November 15, 2013 11:36:16 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>> "Helpful person" wrote in message
>>
>> > There used to be a comedy show from England called "Chef!"
>> > with Lenny Henry which was very entertaining. Anyone here
>> > watched it?
>>
>> Was he the black guy with the wife? If so, yes. I liked it. Alas we
>> are
>> not getting any good shows now on BBC American. Don't think I have
>> watched
>> that channel in years.
>>
> Yes, that's the one. My favorite episode was when
> he went to Lyon for a premier cooking contest.
> All the ingredients had to come from his own
> country. It was hilarious trying to find
> drinkable English wine (in England). It was even
> funnier when it got stolen. He was going from
> wine shop to wine shop (in France) asking for
> English wine!

That does sound funny! Not sure if I remember that or not but it does sound
familiar.

"Helpful person" > wrote in message
...

>>
> I still don't believe you. It's a bit like the Californians believing
> their wine compares favorably with the French. No matter what they
> think, price for price, the French wine is miles ahead. Anyone who has
> traveled in both places will understand.
>
> Anyone want to buy London Bridge?
>
> http://www.richardfisher.com

But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!

"Julie Bove" > wrote in news:l6e76d$ssg$1
@dont-email.me:

> But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!

I think you forgot an "h".

--
Traditions are group efforts to keep the unexpected
from happening.

-- Barbara Tober

On Sat, 16 Nov 2013, Celene Hurdle wrote:

> wrote:
>
>> I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking
>> channels on PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor
>> production and the chef might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of
>> view" -- but it was actual cooking.
>
> But maybe the reason why FN sucks is because many people who watch TV
> watch for the entertainment and not because they want to learn
> something. It seems that recently I've run into so many people who
> can't cook. Maybe FN thought, incorrectly of course, that since so many
> people can't cook today, they decided to NOT focus on cooking and more
> on lifestyle, in order to get that audience. But what they don't get is
> that there are a million "lifestyle" shows out here so if someone's
> looking for a lifestyle show, they don't need to go to FN to get it.
>
It may be that the way the shows activate the viewers is not by making
them want to cook, but to go out and eat. There has certainly been a wave
of that, people blogging about food, people fussing over food trucks,
people taking pictures of their food before they eat. So in one sense
it's an active role, they go out and eat, and write about it, but it's not
leading them into actually cooking.

Not being able to cook is a horrible thing. I'm no great chef, but I've
never been stuck without anything to eat because I can cook.

Michael

"Michael Black" > wrote in message
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1311182059150.31808@darkstar. example.org...
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2013, Celene Hurdle wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking
>>> channels on PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor
>>> production and the chef might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of
>>> view" -- but it was actual cooking.
>>
>> But maybe the reason why FN sucks is because many people who watch TV
>> watch for the entertainment and not because they want to learn something.
>> It seems that recently I've run into so many people who can't cook.
>> Maybe FN thought, incorrectly of course, that since so many people can't
>> cook today, they decided to NOT focus on cooking and more on lifestyle,
>> in order to get that audience. But what they don't get is that there are
>> a million "lifestyle" shows out here so if someone's looking for a
>> lifestyle show, they don't need to go to FN to get it.
>>
> It may be that the way the shows activate the viewers is not by making
> them want to cook, but to go out and eat. There has certainly been a wave
> of that, people blogging about food, people fussing over food trucks,
> people taking pictures of their food before they eat. So in one sense
> it's an active role, they go out and eat, and write about it, but it's not
> leading them into actually cooking.
>
> Not being able to cook is a horrible thing. I'm no great chef, but I've
> never been stuck without anything to eat because I can cook.
>
> Michael

What about Seonkyoung on Restaurant Express, who purportedly learned how to
speak English and to cook from watching the Food Network? Is she a ringer or
just great casting... and seemingly being set up as the winner?

On 11/18/13 4:35 PM, Helpful person wrote:

> You'll next be telling me that Japaneses "scotch"
> is drinkable.

Actually, it is. Particularlyrecent years of production. As are several
Scotch-style whiskies from the US, New Zealand, Canada, and other
countries. And I have over 100 single malt Scotch whiskies in the house
to compare them to, dating back to 1947.

-- Larry

On 11/18/13 5:15 PM, Helpful person wrote:

> .... It's a bit like the Californians believing
> their wine compares favorably with the French. No matter what they
> think, price for price, the French wine is miles ahead. Anyone who has
> traveled in both places will understand.

My wife and I drink a bottle of wine every night, and we travel
extensively in France at least every other year. We are huge fans of
Cahors, Sancerre, and several lesser known French wine regions.

And as a general premise, you are simply wrong. California produces a
huge amount of wonderful wine which compares quite favorably to most
French wine. In particular, CA zinfandel stands level with anything, and
Santa Barbara pinot noirs are absolutely superb, albeit in a bigger,
less austere style than most burgundies.

You are correct that the primary problem with CA wine is that most of it
is overpriced. But French wine is equally overpriced, which is why wine
production and exports from Australia, New Zealand, Argentina, Chile,
and South Africa are increasing so rapidly. And the primary problem with
French wine is that the French industry is still recovering from six or
seven decades of overproduction, mostly to bottle enough plonk to
satisfy unsophisticated English palates. There's a lot of plain old bad
wine in France, and much -- if not most -- of it comes from Bordeaux.

-- Larry

On 11/18/13 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:

> But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!

We have had perhaps two wines from the state of Washington that we
thought were worth drinking. Ditto for Oregon.

The wine industry in Washington is weird. Most grapes are grown east of
the mountains, and most wine is produced west of the mountains. When you
go visiting wineries around Seattle, you spend most of your time in
industrial parks, with nary a vine in sight. For the most part, the WA
industry believes that people cannot be expert in both growing grapes
and making wine, which runs counter to the attitude in most wine
producing areas.

-- Larry

wrote:
wrote:

>>I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking channels
>>on PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor production and
>>the chef might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of view" -- but it was
>>actual cooking.
>
>But maybe the reason why FN sucks is because many people who watch TV watch
>for the entertainment and not because they want to learn something. It
>seems that recently I've run into so many people who can't cook. Maybe FN
>thought, incorrectly of course, that since so many people can't cook today,
>they decided to NOT focus on cooking and more on lifestyle, in order to get
>that audience. But what they don't get is that there are a million
>"lifestyle" shows out here so if someone's looking for a lifestyle show, they
>don't need to go to FN to get it.

Food Network has gotten utterly ridiculous of late. Too many shit reality
shows, not enough actual cookery programs. I used to enjoy watching it, as I
learned a lot of neat recipes from many of the shows, but nowadays I can't
stand to watch it 95% of the time. I like Barefoot Contessa, Pioneer Woman,
and Trisha's Southern Kitchen, but that's it.


As an aside, I'd love to punch Guy Fieri in his stupid face.

"pltrgyst" > wrote in message
...
> On 11/18/13 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
>> But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!
>
> We have had perhaps two wines from the state of Washington that we thought
> were worth drinking. Ditto for Oregon.

Have you tried Chateau St. Michelle? Good stuff!
>
> The wine industry in Washington is weird. Most grapes are grown east of
> the mountains, and most wine is produced west of the mountains. When you
> go visiting wineries around Seattle, you spend most of your time in
> industrial parks, with nary a vine in sight. For the most part, the WA
> industry believes that people cannot be expert in both growing grapes and
> making wine, which runs counter to the attitude in most wine producing
> areas.

I've only been to the Woodinville wineries but some are in an industrial
park. That's true.

"Michael Black" > wrote in message
news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1311182059150.31808@darkstar. example.org...
> On Sat, 16 Nov 2013, Celene Hurdle wrote:
>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking
>>> channels on PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor
>>> production and the chef might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of
>>> view" -- but it was actual cooking.
>>
>> But maybe the reason why FN sucks is because many people who watch TV
>> watch for the entertainment and not because they want to learn something.
>> It seems that recently I've run into so many people who can't cook.
>> Maybe FN thought, incorrectly of course, that since so many people can't
>> cook today, they decided to NOT focus on cooking and more on lifestyle,
>> in order to get that audience. But what they don't get is that there are
>> a million "lifestyle" shows out here so if someone's looking for a
>> lifestyle show, they don't need to go to FN to get it.
>>
> It may be that the way the shows activate the viewers is not by making
> them want to cook, but to go out and eat. There has certainly been a wave
> of that, people blogging about food, people fussing over food trucks,
> people taking pictures of their food before they eat. So in one sense
> it's an active role, they go out and eat, and write about it, but it's not
> leading them into actually cooking.
>
> Not being able to cook is a horrible thing. I'm no great chef, but I've
> never been stuck without anything to eat because I can cook.

You might be right. They have had several shows on where they showcase
various restaurants.

I know a couple of 20somethings who just got married. The male used to
watch cooking shows and said he was learning to cook. His parents (in their
50's) do not cook. They can cook a few things. They did a Thanksgiving
dinner one year. They just choose not to.

Anyway... The 20something male said they discussed it and decided not to
cook. That saddened me.

I could see it if they lived in NY were every place delivers. But they
don't.

My daughter opts not to cook but she also opts not to dine out. She mostly
eats things like fruit, vegetables and cheese that require no cooking.
That's different.

"legal process" > wrote in message
...
> "Michael Black" > wrote in message
> news:alpine.LNX.2.02.1311182059150.31808@darkstar. example.org...
>> On Sat, 16 Nov 2013, Celene Hurdle wrote:
>>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> I used to watch Food Network all the time, and before that cooking
>>>> channels on PBS and other networks. The shows often featured poor
>>>> production and the chef might be clearly nervous -- with no "point of
>>>> view" -- but it was actual cooking.
>>>
>>> But maybe the reason why FN sucks is because many people who watch TV
>>> watch for the entertainment and not because they want to learn
>>> something. It seems that recently I've run into so many people who can't
>>> cook. Maybe FN thought, incorrectly of course, that since so many people
>>> can't cook today, they decided to NOT focus on cooking and more on
>>> lifestyle, in order to get that audience. But what they don't get is
>>> that there are a million "lifestyle" shows out here so if someone's
>>> looking for a lifestyle show, they don't need to go to FN to get it.
>>>
>> It may be that the way the shows activate the viewers is not by making
>> them want to cook, but to go out and eat. There has certainly been a
>> wave of that, people blogging about food, people fussing over food
>> trucks, people taking pictures of their food before they eat. So in one
>> sense it's an active role, they go out and eat, and write about it, but
>> it's not leading them into actually cooking.
>>
>> Not being able to cook is a horrible thing. I'm no great chef, but I've
>> never been stuck without anything to eat because I can cook.
>>
>> Michael
>
> What about Seonkyoung on Restaurant Express, who purportedly learned how
> to speak English and to cook from watching the Food Network? Is she a
> ringer or just great casting... and seemingly being set up as the winner?

I've tried to watch that. Doesn't hold my attention.

On 2013-11-18 10:39 PM, pltrgyst wrote:

> We have had perhaps two wines from the state of Washington that we
> thought were worth drinking. Ditto for Oregon.
>
> The wine industry in Washington is weird. Most grapes are grown east of
> the mountains, and most wine is produced west of the mountains. When you
> go visiting wineries around Seattle, you spend most of your time in
> industrial parks, with nary a vine in sight. For the most part, the WA
> industry believes that people cannot be expert in both growing grapes
> and making wine, which runs counter to the attitude in most wine
> producing areas.
>

Most of the wineries in the Niagara area are surrounded by vineyards.
Many of the smaller ones grow their own. There are farms and wineries.

On Monday, November 18, 2013 6:17:29 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!

Proves my point. In Washington they don't even know that candles are held up to eggs!

On 11/19/13 12:31 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> "pltrgyst" > wrote in message
> ...
>> On 11/18/13 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>>> But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!
>>
>> We have had perhaps two wines from the state of Washington that we
>> thought were worth drinking. Ditto for Oregon.
>
> Have you tried Chateau St. Michelle? Good stuff!

We'll have to disagree on that. I've had better Rieslings from Ontario,
which isn't saying much.

-- Larry

On 2013-11-19 9:18 AM, pltrgyst wrote:
> On 11/19/13 12:31 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>
>> "pltrgyst" > wrote in message
>> ...
>>> On 11/18/13 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>>>
>>>> But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!
>>>
>>> We have had perhaps two wines from the state of Washington that we
>>> thought were worth drinking. Ditto for Oregon.
>>
>> Have you tried Chateau St. Michelle? Good stuff!
>
> We'll have to disagree on that. I've had better Rieslings from Ontario,
> which isn't saying much.
>

Why not? Ontario makes some good Rieslings, and other whites.

On Tuesday, November 19, 2013 9:18:00 AM UTC-5, pltrgyst wrote:
> On 11/19/13 12:31 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
> > "pltrgyst" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> On 11/18/13 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
>
> >>> But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!
>
> >> We have had perhaps two wines from the state of Washington that we
> >> thought were worth drinking. Ditto for Oregon.
>
> > Have you tried Chateau St. Michelle? Good stuff!
>
> We'll have to disagree on that. I've had better Rieslings from Ontario,
> which isn't saying much.
>
> -- Larry

Although I am not fond of German style wines the Niagara
region in Ontario produces good Riesling and ice wine.
Although I've not sampled it, I'm told the Okanagan region
also produces good wine.

I believe Canada is the world's largest producer of ice wine.

What is unfortunate is that the Niagara region used to be a
most wonderful fruit growing area. Much of the fruit is gone,
replaced by the higher profit vines.

Regarding Chateau St. Michelle they make a lot more than just
Riesling. In general they produce an acceptable but
unremarkable product. There are much better wines from
Washington and Oregon.

http://www.richardfisher.com

On Tue, 19 Nov 2013 09:18:00 -0500, pltrgyst > wrote:

> On 11/19/13 12:31 AM, Julie Bove wrote:
> >
> > "pltrgyst" > wrote in message
> > ...
> >> On 11/18/13 6:17 PM, Julie Bove wrote:
> >>
> >>> But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!
> >>
> >> We have had perhaps two wines from the state of Washington that we
> >> thought were worth drinking. Ditto for Oregon.
> >
> > Have you tried Chateau St. Michelle? Good stuff!
>
> We'll have to disagree on that. I've had better Rieslings from Ontario,
> which isn't saying much.
>
You didn't say what part of Canada that wine you drank was grown and
produced, but Ontario, Canada is South of Washington State.
http://i178.photobucket.com/albums/w...nd/seattle.jpg

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.

On Tue, 19 Nov 2013 06:11:03 -0800 (PST), Helpful person
> wrote:

> On Monday, November 18, 2013 6:17:29 PM UTC-5, Julie Bove wrote:
> >
> > But nothing can hold a candle to Washington wine!
>
> Proves my point. In Washington they don't even know that candles are held up to eggs!

Remember, those wines are being produced in a region that is South of
Washington State.

--
Food is an important part of a balanced diet.