Season 3
Season 2
Season 1
I swear I don’t take offense at being called “fish boy” by my fellow critic Jay Rayner on Episode 5 of Top Chef Masters. In fact, I’m thinking of having those very words emblazoned on a t-shirt. Perhaps I will wear it proudly on season two of the show.
What prompted Jay’s words? I sensed an overly fishy taste in chef Nils Noren’s main course— salmon with napa cabbage and chorizo — and Jay didn’t. That two critics would have such divergent opinions about a dish are par for the course when it comes to food criticism. I’ve always believed that off-the-cuff responses to food — the kind Jay, Gael, and I make on the show — make for an even truer assessment of the meal than written reviews do. I tend to be at my most honest when I’m reacting spontaneously to what I eat, without all the contemplating, processing, storytelling, and editing that may come between a meal and a review.
So, when I signed on to be a critic on Top Chef Masters, I decided that despite all the odd situations in which we would be eating and critiquing, I was going to strive to be as open-minded, as true to my gut reactions, and, well, as real as possible. After all, this is reality TV, though I must confess that eating in front of eight cameras is far from my usual notion of what constitutes reality.
Going with my gut led to some interesting dynamics on the show’s most recent episode. For example, Jay, Gael, and I agreed right off the bat that chef Rick Moonen’s ceviche with yuzu and avocado was a standout; the dish was a gorgeous, silken masterpiece. And we were equally unanimous in our opinion that chef Nils’s salmon main course was a hit. That Nils prepared a hundred portions and each one came out impeccably is nothing short of astonishing. But I noticed immediately — and, alas, blurted out — that the fish itself tasted slightly too fishy. Jay and Gael felt otherwise. It may have been that my piece came from a part of the fish closer to the tail or the bloodline than the pieces that Gael and Jay ate. It may have been that I’m more sensitive to fishy-tasting fish (though I love mackerel — one of the fishiest of all fishes — so I doubt that’s the case) or that something about the way the other components in the dish played upon my palate that night produced a perception different from the other critics’.
Taste is subjective, an endlessly personal experience. The response I had was the kind of honest one we all have every time we take a bite. Each of us grew up eating different foods, and our ideas about what food should taste like are built on those formative experiences, whether they included Kraft mac and cheese or kimchi. That I lived in South Asia and Southeast Asia for years shaped my palate as much as my mom’s very capable pot roast did, and every dish I’ve savored since — among them the ones I’ve experienced on this show —h as shaped it some more. Our palates are particular, and various configurations of taste buds possess varying degrees of sensitivity, whether we’re food critics or not.
Is my palate more discerning than Jay’s or Gael’s? I doubt it. Are ours more sensitive than yours? I doubt that, too. But that’s the thing about matters of taste: everyone’s a critic. That’s a good thing, right?
I don't quite understand his palate compared to the other 2 judges. Gael and Jay gave good rating to Michael Chiarello but James didn't. What is wrong with your pallate James and how is it so much different with the other critics and the other foodies on the tables. You almost always gave Michael 3 or 3.5 stars
Do you think Chef Waxman was wrong not to give his competitor fish in his basket? I mean, he did know he had a reputation for fish.
Here, Here. Diversity of palates is the cornerstone of good food. YES it's a good thing. Did you say there will be a TCM season two?? I hope so and I hope you are all a part of it. Get that T-shirt in several colors. Perhaps Mr. Rayner could get one that says ... oops, maybe not. hehehe
I still love ya, Fish Boy. Did you see what Chiarello did i.e. "fishsticks"/fishballs earlier? Now THERE'S some funky fish, my friend.
I concur with you - there is a reason we all taste things differently. There is a reason there is more than one critic on the show. And, to be frank, week after week, you give more insight & purpose to your critiques than either Gael or Jay - they try to be NYC Grande Dame Slick and Mr. Aren't I Funnypants, but YOU, James, know your food, palate, what tastes GOOD, what the purpose of the task was, what worked & didn't, etc.
I must ask, however, about your reaction to the "pannacotta" question - were you just astounded at the question, or questioning the answer that Mr. Funnypants Rayner came up with? Because I may never eat custard again, thanks to him...and your freaked out expression!
Now, go get that T-shirt...
I truly hope and pray that they do a "Top Chefs Critics" to see if ANY of them have the bollocks to stand behind a pan and put their skills where they're palates are. They give me the impression that they are all pen and no pan.
Michael Chiarello is a local chef from here in the wine country (he's Napa, I'm Sonoma), but you've certainly seen him on one of his shows. You can currently see him on Fine Living in the mornings on his show "NapaStyle".
He also has NapaStyle retail stores here in the Bay Area, and a mail order division as well.
What I'd like to hear about is the conversation Douglas Rodriguez got into with Oseland at critic's table. From what I've read, Oseland "suggested" or questioned whether he thought he was "on par" with the other chefs and Doug "suggested" he answer him outside. Now there's a real throwdown.
"Rick was nothing short of awesome" that's because Rick is nothing short of awesome, tragic first round timeout -- the winner is! Seafood Sustainability!
Life is funny...not 30 hours after I had a long debate with a friend about this topic does an episode air and a blog follow about fishy taste. We had sushi and she said it was too fishy. Here today, you said the salmon was too fishy. I'm far from an expert but last I checked, sushi was raw fish, and salmon is a fish. So odds are, it should taste...oh, I don't know...FISHY! Of course it tastes fishy, it's FISH! It's like someone saying "I loved this chicken dish over here, but the second one tasted too chickeny." I just will never understand the whole stigma of fish tasting too fishy.
Anyway, thankx for letting me vent, that's been something I've wanted to rant about somewhere for about seven years.
This was a fun episode and Michael (who I'm still going crazy trying to remember where I've seen him before) earned his win, but Rick was nothing short of awesome. The Quickfire time limit caused him to not have a finished product, which DQ'ed him for the round and gave him zero stars. And then in the main challenge, what does he do? Only winds up nearly winning the whole thing, tying for second place. Just fantastic. If there is a second season of TCM, he has GOT to come back and give this another shot.
I would have loved to have seen more of the debate with yourself and Gael about silverware at a cocktail party. I must say, though, I'm with her side of the argument. Who wants to carry around a knife and fork while mingling around in fancy clothes?
Post new comment
Get Mobile
- Take Bravo With You.
- Get games, show updates, and more on your cell phone.
- Message & data rates may apply.
Comments