In the foregoing chapters it has been proved that many dishes are unsatisfactorily named, and a way is shown whereby dishes can be given names, which are intelligible to everybody. Since indeed the chefs, stewards, etc., generally write the lists of dishes which go into print and perhaps have to be translated, it is easily understood that intelligible bills of fare and menus depend much upon their good will. One cannot expect that a waiter, menu-writer or printer shall render unintelligible names intelligible and translate them. Abbreviated names perhaps cannot be found in books or perhaps one dish may be given in the place of another which does not compare with the one which is originally meant. But for the compilers of bills of fare it would be only a matter of a few minutes to write down the names of dishes according to the given rules in this book.
For instance a chef may prepare a dish which is given in a cook book as Dindon a VEs-pagnol (Turkey in Spanish style). In this case the chef, or the maker of the bill of fare, should not write down the name as given in the book but write it in a more detailed way. If the tirfkey is stuffed and roasted then he should mention it and also mention the side dishes. In this instance he should write as follows:
Stuffed, Koast Turkey Peas and Carrots Madeira Sauce.
But there are also chefs who are not well versed in English. They should write the names in, let us say, French and in the same manner as has been stated before. Simple French is always easy to translate. Let us say a chef writes as follows.
Consomme a harlequin. Filet de Boeuf a PEspagnole. Longe de Veau a la Bechamel. Dinde a la Portugaise.
In this case the translator would translate as follows:
Consomme, Harlequin style. Tenderloin of Beef, Spanish. Loin of Veal, Bechamel. Turkey-hen, Portuguese.
If a chef wrote the same dishes as given below then the translation also would be plain and could be easily made.
Consomme aux Quenelles de Volaille. Filet de Boeuf pique, roti au Macaroni, Sauce Espagnole. Longe de Veau rotie, Bechamel. Dinde farcie, rotie, Portugaise.
Consomme with Chicken Balls. Larded, roast Tenderloin of Beef Macaroni Spanish Sauce.
Roast Loin of Veal, Bechamel. Stuffed, roast Turkey-hen, Portuguese.
For the makers of bills of fare and menus the given rules come into consideration primarily. A certain successive way of naming dishes should always be followed.
Leg of Veal. Roast Leg of Veal. Larded, roast Leg of Veal. Stuffed, larded, roast Leg of Veal.
Roast Leg of Veal w. Cream. Larded, roast Leg of Veal w. Cream. Stuffed, larded, roast Leg of Veal w. Cream. Roast Leg of Veal w. Mixed Vegetables & Tomato Sauce.
Larded, roast Leg of Veal w. Mixed Vegetables & Tomato Sauce.
Stuffed, larded, roast Leg of Veal w. Mixed Vegetables & Tomato Sauce.
Roast Leg of Veal, Monpensier. Larded, roast Leg of Veal, Monpensier. Stuffed, larded, roast Leg of Veal, Montpensier.
The same successive way can be followed with such dishes that have a name which includes their preparations.
Veal Stew, Lamb Stew. Beef Stew. Veal-Lamb Stew. Veal-Beef Stew. Lamb Stew, Irish. Lamb Stew, American. Lamb Stew, English. Veal-Beef Stew, Irish. Veal-Beef Stew, American Veal-Beef Stew, English, etc.
To this one may reply that e. g. the roasting and stuffing can be done in different ways and. therefore style designations must be used. What does such a designation mean to the average guest in such a case? Ninety times out of a hundred it would mean nothing at all to them. A guest does not care whether he gets a piece of veal which is prepared with a few spices, or other little things, more or less. This is simply the cooks' matter. If such items in preparing food, would be designated with style names then the list of names would be endless; there are not even enough words in ths world to name them all. Before using a style designation one rather should call a dish by its right name. If e. g. the cooking is done with an ingredient that changes the taste much more from that of plain cooking, let us say red wine. The place which is perhaps occupied by a style designation can be filled out much better with the words red wine. But if the latter together with the main preparation is left out to make place for a certain i n ........................ s t y le or a la so and so then it is absolutely sinful to withhold the most important items from the guests. As to the fillings it must be added that is is not necessary at all to express these by a separate name. Guests will not know what kind of a filling is meant; for them it is enough to know that a food is stuffed. If one should designate a filling with the term Italian, Royal, etc., the guest would not even know that the food was stuffed. The simple words filled or stuffed says much more to them, and therefore it should be dominating.
As to the various style designations and their comprehension it may be easily asserted that ninety per cent of them are not even understood by men of the trade. Could a person tell what the following style designations meant without looking into a book?
Loin of Veal, Spanish /Style/. Leg of Mutton, Bordeaux /Style/. Tenderloin of Beef, Westphalian /Style/. Tenderloin of Beef, Portuguese /Style/. Sirloin of Beef, Spanish /Style/. Mackerel, Flemish /Style/. Sole, Soubise /Style/. Roast Goose, Mecklenburg /Style/.
Would you expect to find the following names for the same dishes?
Larded, roast Loin of Veal, Spanish Sauce Larded, roast Tenderloin of Beef, Westphalian, [/Garniture/. Roast Tenderloin of Beef, Stuffed Tomatoes. Roast Sirloin of Beef, Spanish Sauce. Stuffed, fried Mackerel. Boiled, glazed Salmon on Rice, Chambord /Garniture/.
Fried Sole with Onion Sauce or Onion Puree. Stuffed, roast Goose with Red Cabbage & Sausages.
These few instances, which could be enlarged a thousandfold, show plainly that the style designations of to-day are not satisfactory. It is really no wonder that guests often read high sounding names, give an order, and then are disappointed when only "plain" dishes are served, which they know are quite differently called in simple English. It is also natural for guests to say that the restaurant men give such names purposely to get higher prices though this is rarely intended. One also need not be surprised if the comic papers take advantage of such names, especially if they are mixed Avith foreign terms; and even the theatres make fun of them. There certainly isn't any business that furnishes so much food for laughter as the restaurant trade and this to a large extent on account of the naming. The restaurant men alone are responsible in the future, if this continues, because the existing evils can be helped. The present method of naming dishes must be brought into a logical and sensible form by using certain rules. To realize how far away we have gone from intelligible naming can be seen by the great Careme writing in his earlier days Potage de petit sagou blanc lies au consomme. This is certainly too long for modern bills of fare and it was abbreviated to Consomme au sagou blanc or Consomme au sagou. And if the French write simply Potage puree de pois and Gateau de poisson, sauce tomate for Potage a la puree de pois and Gateau de poisson a la sauce de tomates we also find it intelligible. So is:
"Cochon de lait a la broche, russe,'7 "Cochon de lait farci, russe." "Cochon de lait froid, russe." "Cochon de lait roti, russe".