Extra, Extra
Around Town
Health Care Bill Heads To U.S. House Floor For Debate, Vote
Alleged Lottery Ticket Con Artists Charged
Is Sammy Sosa Turning White?
Lobster Royale from L2O - check out that beautifully seared piece of foie gras.
To celebrate the one year anniversary of the foie gras ban's repeal, Chicago Chefs For Choice will host the 2009 Foie Gras Fest. Cyrano's Bistrot & Wine Bar owner, Chef Didier Durand, is co-founder of Chicago Chefs For Choice and has been an outspoken voice against the foie gras ban. Each of the participating restaurants listed below will have a specially-created $10 foie gras dish.
Participating restaurants include:
- Cafe Bernard, Chef Bernard LeCoq, (773-871-2100)
- Cafe Matou, Chef Charlie Socher, Chicago, (773-384-8911)
- Carlos, Chef Carlos Nieto, Highland Park (847-432-0770)
- Cyrano's Bistrot, Chef Didier Durand, Chicago, (312-467-0546)
- David Burke's Primehouse, Chef Rick Gresh, (312-660-6010)
- Hemmingway's Bistro, Oak Park, ( 708-227-2676)
- May Street Market, Chef Alex Cheswick, (312-218-1306)
- Union League Club, Chef Michael Garbin, (312-435-4822)
add to stumble upon
add to reddit
tweet this
post to facebook
shame. Animal abuse in any form is deplorable.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Foie_gras
http://www.banfoiegras.org
@helenback - You won't get any argument from me. Thank you for the links; it is always good to see the other side of the coin before choosing one.
-L.
Luv ya, L.S., but there really isn't any 'other side of the coin' here.
The only way to get foie gras is through deplorable treatment of animals. How anyone can still consume this is beyond me. To actually celebrate this ban is just a shame.
Very sad to see this.
@Ingrid - I am inclined to agree. After seeing one picture of a duck with a tube shoved down its throat...well, yeah. I am not a consumer.
Thank you for being even handed and respectful in your criticism; I respect that.
-L.
'Foie gras' birds are probably treated better than big farm chickens, if you really are concerned about animal abuse and modern food commerce.
Love FG and I'm fine with how the ducks are treated on the farms that I've purchased FG from.
Wow. Instead of just being thankful the foie gras ban is over turned and serve it as they usually would, they now want to throw it in our faces and celebrate this barbaric duck fattening ritual. I will personally make sure to never eat at these places, and I will ask my associates and friends to not eat there either.
Jerec...If the standard you have for dining is how "barbaric" the food was prepared, then I have to add:
*Shoving tubes down a throat is not the only form of barbaric behavior.
*Every single restaurant's food is prepared in some sort of barbaric way.
*Further, any specials on said food would constitute "celebrating the barbaric behavior".
With that, I have to ask...where do you dine where the food was not prepared in some barbaric/celebratory way?
@ mh95149 and aaronsinger,
So then you're ok with having tubes shoved down an animal's throat that many times just rips through their throats and/or organs? This is being treated well?
Have you ever been force fed?
There is a practice of force feeding little girls in Mauritania to fatten them up, as men there prefer their women on the round side.
I guess humanity still has a long way to go. If we can treat humans this way, what hope is there for the animals?
I loooooove going out to eat, and enjoy fine dining, but I will not patronize a restaurant that serves foie gras.
Nice straw man argument. I'm not condoning the practice, but why single out foie gras? Are those ducks treated worse than factory farm chickens?
And foie gras is hardly a "trend", as someone else suggested.
I just don't agree with completely banning a food because some people think it's immoral. If you think that, then don't eat it.
Foie Gras certainly isn't a trend. The production of force feeding geese and ducks in order to savor their outsized livers — among other uses for the big waddling fowl — goes back to ancient Egypt.
Caro mentions in his book that one reason foie gras is singled out is because its practice in North America is still relatively new, compared to the vertical farming techniques of, say, raising chickens. It's easier to make an example of the little guy (foie gras farms) than factory farms that stuff their chickens as bad, if not worse, than a foie gras farm.
That we're talking about a handful of farms that were very slow to unify against the anti-foie movement here, they were a sitting duck.
Pun totally intended.
A nice parallel to this would be Hot Doug's being fined and cited for serving foie gras during the city's ban while most of the fine dining establishments in town still either served it outright, called it something else, or served it as a free course with the purchase of a salad or other appetizer. Many of these places were just as brazen as Doug Sohn in selling it. But, compared to the bottom lines of the white tablecloth places, it was easier to make an example of Hot Doug's.
among other uses for the big waddling fowl — goes back to ancient Egypt.
Sure, but current foodie inspired interest does not.
I would think the very fact that Hot Dougs ever sold a foie gras hot dog is proof enough that it's a trend.
Bacon has existed for thousands of years, after all, but you can't say that's not trendy.
Thanks Chicagoist for this guilt trip!
O.k., but you are right, no more
foie gras even though it is a delicious treat especially served at Louis XVI in Nola's French Quarter
Hey geniuses!
Stronger species prey upon the weak. Humans, being the strongest, can have their pick of what they like to eat. Should we forbid snakes from eating mice?
By the same token, I don't feel bad when I hear about a shark attacking people swimming in the ocean. You wander out to where a shark is dominant, you have to deal with the risk.
"Stronger species prey upon the weak. Humans, being the strongest, can have their pick of what they like to eat. Should we forbid snakes from eating mice?"
Not that I care too much about the poor ducks, but humans are supposed to be more than just animals acting largely on instinct and relatively simple brain power.
If not, you are just making the standard argument for social darwinism, and not even in an interesting or original way.
Now, if you really believe this, can I come over and eat whatever pets you might have? Or, if I were so inclined, you? Hope you are tender ...
If snakes can't eat mice, then what are they supposed to eat?
Nature is cruel, but snakes, hawks, etc., they gotta eat too, right?
But we don't need to eat foie gras to survive.
Matilda beat me to it, what a piss poor argument. I'm going to go torture my neighbors pets to death now, because after all, I'm the dominant species here. Unfortunately I've been cursed with 'reason' and 'empathy' though.
People on both sides of the Foie Gras issue don't seem very convincing to me. I just think it's gross regardless.
I would suggest, before this becomes an echo chamber of "he said/she said", that you read Mark Caro's The Foie Gras Wars, regardless of which side you fall on in this argument.
How dare you suggest thoughtful investigation of the subject at hand! What the hell is wrong with you?
This is not a war, to me at least.
I don't eat the stuff, I don't patronize places that serve it...and besides the ethical side, it's just not good for you. I mean, isn't bacon enough? You really have to have foies gras?
There are no two sides to this story. You get the stuff by torturing animals. It's bad enough that pigs, cows and chickens have to go to slaughterhouses and some are raised in deplorable conditions...but at least there are methods to raising and killing meat animals that are kinder...at least those DO exist.
But to produce foie gras, there is no other way around it...the process is abuse. It. Is. Abuse.
How you can see it in any other way baffles me.
Like so many things, I think for most it's about trends and status rather than actual honest enjoyment.
I think the war refers to the politics of the matter, to, Ingrid. I've not read the book yet, but I hear it's pretty good.
"There are no two sides to this story."
That's a mildly totalitarian view to to have.
"How you can see it in any other way baffles me."
That's actually your loss, I think. Seeing through others' eyes is a wonderful gift that is difficult to achieve and even harder to sustain, but is key to persuading people that your ideas are better.
This is extremely childish, but the only reason I tried this dish--two or three times, including once in some swanky place in France--is because the PETA-like, take-no-prisoners attitude of those who care more about ducks than do I, and who insist that I am an asshole because of that lack of empathy. I guess I wanted to thumb my nose at that attitude, hence the childish response on my part (I also wanted to see what all the fuss was about). I don't care for the dish, as it turns out, so I guess I won't be harming any more ducks in the future.
I agree that humans should not be cruel to animals. But I see no reason to treat animals as though they are humans, either.
Well, I guess some of us are just born with more empathy than others, because I've got to tell you that the first time I had foie gras, I fucking loved the stuff. I could have made a main course out if it!
Of course, that love affair ended when I found out how it's produced.
And treating animals humanely doesn't equate to treating them like humans. It just means not abusing them.
Getting foie gras = abuse. So, what's the other side of the story?
"Getting foie gras = abuse. So, what's the other side of the story?"
Hell if know, or really care that much, as animal and food issues often bore me more than Henry James. I'm just pointing out that being 100% certain that you know THE TRUTH is usually a sign that you don't. Ironic, isn't it? Or painfully obvious.
If you shove a tube down an animal's throat and rip its esophagus and/or other organs open, that doesn't mean abuse to you?
You're ok with that?
And I'm on the other end of the spectrum, animal rights issues (along with human rights too...I am a big donor to Amnesty International as well as varying animal rights organizations) are high on my priority list.
I'm not professing to knowing everything, but I do profess to knowing that this practice is torture and I wish it were still outlawed. We can all live without foie gras.
I suppose you'd be ok with soylent green too?
"If you shove a tube down an animal's throat and rip its esophagus and/or other organs open, that doesn't mean abuse to you?
You're ok with that?"
Doesn't bother me as much as it does you, obviously. Not saying it's an unimportant issue, only that I don't care about ducks too much.
"We can all live without foie gras."
What other duties do you have besides boss of what all mankind should eat? Can you do anything about the broken window in my apartment?(As an aside, this type of PETA-like attitude, I suspect, turns off more people when it comes to animal rights than one might think.)
"I suppose you'd be ok with soylent green too?"
Yes, Ingrid, that is EXACTLY what I am saying. As well, I am Charlton Heston's love child, the one he ignored because I preferred knitting to playing with muskets.
But ... soylent green is people. It's PEOPLE!
Some people really should be soylent green.
Now, that's not exactly kind, is it? :)
Never mind I tend to agree.
Turning both screeching PETA folk and ostentatious, yuppie, foodie trash into Soylent Green and feed them to the animals.
No every PETA person is a screecher :)
Give Peas A Chance!!!!!
"Turn" that is.
Well, matilda....I've been an animal lover for as long as I can remember, before I knew what PETA was and before I knew about the existence of foie gras.
The first time I saw animal abuse was when I witnessed a neighbor beating his pupy for chewing some household item...if you can't be moved by that then there is something missing in your synapses.
I don't like to see ANYONE, human or animal suffer at the hands of any oppressor.
I guess that kind of makes me an honorary Buddhist...if I believed in organized religion, that is.
Fortunately there are groups who do their best to protect those who have no voice (animal and human).
I'd like to live in a world where all living beings were treated kindly, wouldn't you?
Sorry about your window...sure...I'll come over and fix that for you, I have no problem helping out a friend in need!!
"I'd like to live in a world where all living beings were treated kindly, wouldn't you?"
Of course.
But the challenge is that different people have different views of what kind treatment is. Some, for instance, oppose hunting in various forms, while some don't, or some only oppose hunting for pure sport, etc.
That's why I never trust anyone who pretends to have THE TRUTH.
I don't think people have varying views on what kindness is. Evil or not, we're all aware of what it is to be kind.
The people who torture, abuse or neglect animals just don't give a shit one way or the other.
They're not factoring whether or not this or that is 'kind'. It just doesn't matter to them.
And I don't know what to make of your statement about not trusting people who claim to know the TRUTH....you seem pretty cocksure of your opinions on this board as well.
This is starting to sound like the argument for torturing prisoners. Cheney and Co are sure it's not torture. I'm sure it is. So, I guess you just can't trust either Ingrid or Cheney either, eh? So far, Cheney hasn't volunteered to be waterboarded, but if you volunteer to be force fed with a tube and after your pipes were ripped apart and you're bleeding from you throat, if you tell me it's not torture, then I'll believe you and maybe start eating foie gras again.
"I don't think people have varying views on what kindness is. Evil or not, we're all aware of what it is to be kind."
They why are people debating you? That's an incredibly naive statement to make, one that ignores culture and history and economics.
"The people who torture, abuse or neglect animals just don't give a shit one way or the other."
Perhaps, but one person's abuse is another's simple preparation of food.
"you seem pretty cocksure of your opinions on this board as well."
Yet, but I never pretend to know THE TRUTH, and often admit when I am wrong, which is pretty often.
"This is starting to sound like the argument for torturing prisoners. "
Wow--did you feel that, that swooning sensation in your stomach??--that's what happens when one rides a rollercoaster of logic.
"then I'll believe you and maybe start eating foie gras again."
Why on earth do you think I care whether you eat foie gras? Eat it or not. Doesn't bother me either way.
Calm down matilda.
I am against foie gras, and you don't care one way or the other.
I got that.
I also know that you're real smart and real logical and could beat my ass in a debate any day of the week blindfolded and with your hands tied behind your back.
I got that too.
I just don't like to see animals being abused.
Never have, never will.
"I just don't like to see animals being abused.
Never have, never will."
Neither do I, yet we apparently have significant differences on this issue, and don't think as though we share one mind, despite your confusion. Funny how things work.
Wow, I was all ready to fall in love with you until you burned me with the 'don't think as though we share one mind'...
Thanks for clearing up my confusion.
Will I ever find true love?
Spook seems available. But he's even more in love with himself than either of us are.
LOL
Good one.
Ahhhh Spook the Uniter, bringing folks together like Maxwell House Coffee
This doesn't seem like more "abuse" than what occurs to the other animals we eat:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ABeWlY0KFv8
Dear Ingrid: We mammals have a delicate epithelian tissue in our esophagus, water fowl have strong callous keratine in theirs and that´s why they can swallow big spiney fish or accept a soft metalic tube. They don´t have gag reflex either. Ducks aren´t Donald Duck. You, as many that support animal rigths extremists whose hidden agenda is having the whole world feeding soy, tofu and algea as the main sources of nutrition -or having pets banned altogheter (including animals in zoos, rodeos, circus, scientific research and even seen-eye dogs)are against the very narrow options of other people in the world. Where I live, in Central America more than half the population don´t have the many options you guys have in first world countries, where you choose to eat or no to eat meat, or foie gras. Here they either eat or don´t. We live a different reality than you do Ingrid. Millions of people, as we speak, would go to bed tonight with only one precious egg, watery cow milk and a tortilla in their bellies. If you are against any animal product consumption you are aligned with PETA or the Animal Liberation Front who care a lot more about a debateble animal cruelty vrs. world hunger. Let´s get the snobbism of well to do westerners out of this equation.