Tuesday, July 25, 2006

I would love to be a guest at this dinner:

Gadsby's Outlaw Dinner will be served Thursday, July 27, from 7-10pm, at Noé Restaurant at the Omni Hotel in Downtown Los Angeles. The price is $95 per person. For more information and reservations, call 213-356-4100.

Chef Robert Gadsby tackles the taboo with a daringly delicious menu.
Chef Gadsby and his team of culinary agents will provide diners with what may be their last 'legal' taste of several dishes up for censure. The seven course tasting menu will include morel mushrooms, absinthe, hemp seed, sous vide preparation and foie gras.

JULY 27, 2006
7:00 to 10:00 p.m.
$95.00 per person

To make a reservation, call 213.356.4100

Reservations and credit card guarantee required. 72-hour cancellation policy. Tax and gratuity not included.


Anonymous said...

oooo...my bf (who is a chef) made me foie gras for the 1st time in Jan or whenever the Oscars were. We went to an Oscar party. It was yummy, but so bad...did you hear they are trying to outlaw it in Chicago...No fatty duck liver for them anymore! ;) Hope you find someone to go to the Festival w/ and maybe the dinner. :)


cakegrrl said...

not the dinner, but hopefully the festival! :)

foie gras = meat butter. hahaha

cakegrrl said...

Also, I think it's BLASPHEMY that they have already outlawed meat butter here. The law goes into effect the year 2012.
Where is our freedom going?
I don't eat the stuff, but I don't want to tell someone else not to!

Anonymous said...

Oh I know!!! Did you post on that thread about this topic? I do think it would be nice if restaurants were forced to publish nutrition info on diff. meals...but I should definitely have the right to CHOOSE what I order. A more informed choice would just be nice. :)

cakegrrl said...

No, I didn't, but...
I am not sure about the nutritional info bit. I don't think they should have to do that unless they are a major chain. If I eat out somewhere, it's pretty much common sense what to and what not to pick to eat.

ACK said...

I am not sure I agree that we should have the "freedom" to eat whatever we want, if that means there will be cruel treatment to animals. Force feeding results in unnatural effects on the duck's bodies including livers swollen to many times their normal size, impaired liver function, expansion of the abdomen making it difficult for them to walk, and death if the force feeding is continued. In addition, force feeding methods can cause scarring of the esophagus.

Just a thought. But maybe I am the other extreme of this issue. I buy all my meat/chicken from organic free range farms.

cakegrrl said...

I just don't want legislation to get out of hand and then all of a sudden I can't get a pizza or a twinkie anymore. Regulation on things is great, but prohibition? That's not freedom.

ACK said...

Prohibition? How can you compare twinkies/pizza production to Foie Gras? Not exactly apples and oranges.

ammmmmanda said...

We are talking about organ meat right? EEEWWWWW!

Guess, I don't see limited animal tortue as a bad thing, I kind of link similar things like factory farms. Cows are supposed to eat grass, not corn, and roam on pastures, not stand on concrete pads till they are slaughtered.

I don't exactly what ducks eat, but I know they are not supposed to have swollen livers, unless somehow they drink too much beer. And I would assume that fois gras was more of the attempt to make some tasty out of all parts of the animal. Waste not=want not. That original intent has been lost if you are raising ducks for swollen livers.

My opinion solely though.

cakegrrl said...

And thank you both for posting your opinions. It's good to know we can believe different things and agree to disagree. :)
I was referring to the "twinkie" tax that has been tossed around by congress. It's just another example of a law that could get out of hand if it were passed.
I agree that foie gras production uses animal cruelty in it's production, but is it not cruel to distroy an unborn fetus? See all the comparisons one can make? I would never want to take away a woman's right to choose. It's her right. Just like it's someone's same right to eat meat butter. ;)

ACK said...

You are the second person I have heard throw out the comparison to an unborn fetus. Honestly. I don't get it. An animal that is living, breathing, existing...very different matter. But then that would get us into an entire other issue that I really don't want to tackle on this blog!

cakegrrl said...

yeah, me neither. let's duke it out in person, sister!!!! hahahaha