DALTIN TRIO - A REVIEW

C.A.C 34 (Collectif d'Artistes de Capestang)(Artists' Collective of Capestandg) continued its tradition of bringing artists of outstanding quality to the region with their presentation on 20 February, 2015 of the Daltin Trio.These guys were good: Grégory Daltin ; Accordion, Accordina, Bandonéon / Julien Duthu ; Upright Bass / Sébastien Gisbert ; Percussion. They treated a full house to melodic, rhythmic jazz within tight, dynamic compositions. Each member contributed, demonstrating mastery of their instruments and a flair for composition. Check them out on Youtube and, if like what you hear and you get the opportunity, see them in person. We're glad that we did.

BAR LE 40, QUARANTE - A REVIEW

RETURNED FEBRUARY, 2017. THIS INITIAL REVIEW FEBRUARY, 2015. SEE EDIT AT END.

I live in the little French town of Quarante. Quarante also happens to be the French word for the number 40. Is it any wonder that the local sports bar/cafe is called Bar Le 40?

Let's be honest. Bar Le 40 is a local joint with no ambiance whatsoever, inside or out. Sitting on a busy intersection with cars whizzing by all day, you are protected from even a minimal view of that traffic by cars parked at the curb, obstructing your view (such as it is) because the sidewalk is only a few feet wide. Except for a few posters, the interior hasn't been redecorated since the town was liberated...in 1918. But as the only place in town where you can sit down at a table and be served a meal, nothing really matters as long as the food is edible. On a recent Friday, lunching with a couple of my neighbors while Cathey was out of town, the food was edible. Not great, but not bad and worth the price.

The three of us each chose the menu of the day for 12 Euros, add a Euro for a liter of house wine. For starters, choice of salad with a wedge of a cheese tart or a simple plate of charcuterie. For the main, fish filet or biftek with a side of either frites or spinach. Several dessert choices including an apple tart and ice cream, but we all chose the caramelized flan. As I said, all edible. I think the beef was a better choice than the fish, but that's me. And the spinach looked a bit limp, but I chose the frites...also a bit limp. The flan was just fine. All in all, we filled up and didn't feel cheated.

They say that the house confit de canard is a good choice for dinner. I'll give it a try. Yes, I will be back. After all, it's the only place in town where you can sit down at a table and be served a meal.

EDIT, FEBRUARY 2017: There's been a change in ownership and in the kitchen. If I understand correctly, the new chef is the son of a previous one. There's been a dash of paint here and there and I'm told that the bathroom is now up to handicap standards. I generally do not frequent the restrooms in bars. I'm funny that way.

But wait. Another change in early 2018. Another new chef. Another new menu. And this time, success. An upgrade that really did the trick.

I would rate the new lunch menu as about 50% better than the previous. The starters continue to be simple - charcuterie and salad, but each above previous levels with an occasionally interesting salad combination. The major change is the main plate. The new formula is just that bit more adventurous. Oh, there's still that chewy beef that we've come to expect but at least the fries are cut from whole potatoes and not reconstituted. But the second choice has upped the game - one day parmentier of beef, one day duck hearts, one day grilled and marinated chicken. The desserts are more interesting, too. And better ice cream. So the possibility of a potentially interesting surprise exists.

Suddenly, our local bar has us checking Facebook daily to see what's up. Wow!

Read more of my reviews HERE.

NETANYAHU, CONGRESS, AND A PALESTINIAN-ARAB STATE

I believe in Israel's right to exist in peace with its neighbors.

Is peace possible when the charters of the Palestinian Authority and Hamas call for Israel's destruction, when regional despots like Ayatollah Ali Khamenei call for death to Israeli Jews? There are those who would tell you to ignore the charters and the speeches, that they are just words. But Jews have come to understand, after centuries of being taught by example, that when a political movement or a government official says that they will kill Jews, they are to be believed. The original Zionists made that assumption and the Israeli government continues to operate on that premise.

Ask yourself a simple question: Which hypothetical circumstance would be most likely to lead to peace in the region, disarming the Palestinians Arabs or disarming the Israelis? As Golda Meir is reputed to have said, though she certainly wasn't the first: Disarming the Palestinians Arabs would lead to peace. Disarming the Israelis would lead to the destruction of Israel.

Step back for a moment and look at history. There are those who will tell you that history doesn't matter, that we should focus on the present. Those people don't understand either the Jewish or the Arab mentality. Events that took place centuries ago are to both peoples as fresh today as a cool morning breeze. We can dispute whether or not the Palestinian Arabs were in the main chased from Israel by Zionists in 1948 or if the bulk of them left their homes at the urging of Arab armies promising a swift return once the Jews were pushed into the sea. Either way, certain subsequent events cannot be disputed:

1. The Palestinian Arab refugee camps were built by their Arab brothers who, with the exception of Jordan, refused to allow the refugees basic civil rights and a path to a normal life within the host country. As a result, while in other countries Palestinian Arabs have been radicalized and promised a right of return that has not been and in all probabilities will not be granted, the bulk of Palestinian Arabs in Jordan are fully integrated and say that they wouldn't return even if given the opportunity.

2. From 1948 to 1967, the West Bank and Gaza were in Arab hands. A Palestinian Arab state could have been declared without Israel's involvement. Israel would no doubt have had security questions. In the central part of the country, before 1967 you could have taken a flying leap from Israel's eastern border and landed hip deep in the Med. But if the neighboring Arab states had prepared for peace instead of war, those questions could have been answered.

3. After 1967 and after Egypt recognized Israel's right to exist, Israel traded land, valuable land, to Egypt in turn for peace. That peace has held for close to 50 years. I repeat. Peace with Egypt - as well as Jordan - has held for 50 years. The prerequisite? Simply recognizing Israel's right to exist and establishing diplomatic relations.

I believe in a two-state solution. I believe that Israel's settlement policy is misguided, primarily in place as a sop to the Israeli political Right. But I support Israel against such uninformed charges as genocide against the Palestinian Arabs. Israel could level Gaza and bounce the ashes. It restrains itself from doing so even if its recent actions in Gaza do not lend themselves to the term 'restraint'. Ask yourself the outcome if such military asymmetry were reversed.

And now we come to Netanyahu. Why shouldn't Netanyahu address the US Congress?

Let me count the ways...

1. The Constitution clearly gives the Executive responsibility for the bulk of the conduct of foreign affairs including the negotiation of treaties. Yes, Congress must approve. But the Founders understood that there should only be one voice at the table during negotiations with foreign powers. That voice belongs to the Executive. Negotiation by committee, and therefore this foray into the negotiations with Iran by Congress, is just stupid.

2. We know what Netanyahu will say. He will say that Iran is an existential threat. That Iran cannot be trusted. That Israel cannot allow Iran to possess a nuclear weapon. There. I've given Netanyahu's speech for him. He can save the time and the jet fuel it will take to get here and back to Israel to continue campaigning for reelection.

3. Speaking of campaigning, the US has a longstanding policy of not interfering in democratic elections conducted by its friends. Well, except for the CIA. But since the Mossad is better at covert ops than the CIA, the Israelis don't have to worry on that score. They should worry, however, that Netanyahu thinks that it's a good idea to drag the US Congress into Israeli politics. Our Congress has an approval rating only slightly higher than Boko Haram's. And there is reason to believe that the fear tactics Netanyahu is using may backfire, that his political opposition is coalescing. Is Netanyahu desperate or just clueless?

4. And speaking of politics, Americans have a saying that politics ends at the border. Not any more, apparently. If speaking before Congress makes Netanyahu look silly, John Boehner conducting foreign affairs behind the President's back makes John Boehner look silly - or sillier, depending on what you think of his tanning spray.

There's more, but that's enough. The proposed speech is bad for the negotiations with Iran, bad for Netanyahu, and bad for Congress. What's the point?

SNOW IN THE LANGUEDOC - IT DOES, YOU KNOW

 One of the reasons that we moved to the south of France was Cathey's vow, "I will never shovel snow again." Well, we won't have to shovel but it was a bit of a shock to wake up to a dusting of the white stuff.  It's the first week of February, after all. The temperature has seldom dipped below freezing and this is the first hint off wintry precipitation. So I suppose that we can't complain. However Sylvie, less than a year old, was befuddled. And once a flake landed on her nose, she wanted nothing more to do with the stuff except at a distance.

An hour after these pictures were taken, the snow was gone. Melted. As one friend in the States put it, the beauty of snow without the shoveling.

RESTAURANT L'AMBASSADE, BEZIERS - A REVIEW

When I was writing restaurant reviews professionally in the Lehigh Valley of eastern Pennsylvania, I would take copious notes. How was the room furnished? Did the acoustics allow for comfortable conversation? Crisp linens? Sparkling glassware? Was the service attentive, professional? And I would carefully describe every dish - visual presentation, aroma, texture, taste, ingredients, derivation. All grist for the mill. I was being paid to eat and I was determined to give my employer and the reader their money's worth.

I now live in the south of France, in the land of the Impressionist artists who taught us that beauty is not always best expressed through strict attention to photographic detail. It's possible, perhaps desirable, to simply sketch the outlines and let the imagination of the viewer fill in the forms. I'm certainly not in the same league on the printed page as the Impressionists were on canvas, but you get my meaning. My style is not as precise as it once was. You'll have to get to know me, to trust me, and to read between the lines.

Why have I spent so much time explaining my current process? Because I have just finished the best fine dining experience that I have yet to have had in France and I don't want to spend an inordinate amount of time on the details. The details would only fuzz up the experience rather than sharpen it. There are those who would disagree, who would demand every jot and tittle. Fine. Enjoy a lunch at L'Ambassade. (And you WILL enjoy it.) Write your own revue. But think of me as the Rod Serling of restaurant reviewers. Are you familiar with the customary opening of Twilight Zone? Rod would face the camera, perhaps smoking a cigarette, and say, "Imagine, if you will, a world in which..."

Imagine...

L'Ambassade is directly opposite the train station in Beziers, not the toniest part of town. With an unprepossessing facade and simple, adequate, but almost pedestrian interior furnishings, L'Ambassade doesn't strike any poses.

The service is attentive but not intrusive. Informative without being overbearing. Timed to our pace rather than demanding that we conform to theirs. Nearly three hours at table and we never felt either rushed or neglected. (You read that right. Three hours. For lunch.)

An assortment of amuse-bouches presented us with a kaleidoscope of tastes and textures. I particularly enjoyed a test-tube portion of creamy mussel soup sipped through a straw (my table mates found it a bit too briny) and a tiny bowl layered with custard, sauced mushrooms, and a lobster froth. About six different such tidbits were presented to us on two rectangular plates, one plate for each side of the table, enough for the seven of us to have one of each of the bits.

The starters were diverse and unusual, for this Yank anyway. I had the masque de cochon, pig snout for the uninitiated, with a skewer of fried offal. Calm down. If you are a meat eater in a culture that adheres to the 'from tail to nose' philosophy, you should be prepared for a little tail, a little nose. The thin circles of tender snout were quite tasty and were accompanied by green lentils that were prepared in such a way, and in such a creamy sauce, that completely changed their typically beany flavor. Cathey had an off-menu velouté de champignons (mushroom soup) that spanned the gamut of textures from solid bits of mushroom to foam. She described the soup as essence of mushroom.

We were offered several such off-menu items, by the way. We all chose from the 30 Euro menu that, in print, featured two choices for starter and three mains. In fact, we were offered about twice as many choices. Our host, a new foodie friend of ours here in France, is well known in L'Ambassade. Since he dines there often enough to have run through the seasonal menu, the chef provides an alternative or two for him when he books a reservation.

I chose ris d'agneau (lamb sweetbreads) for my main course. I am not a particular fan but the other three choices - two on menu and one off - were each seafood and none caught my fancy. Simply grilled, on a bed of rizotto adorned with truffle shavings, and with a couple of hearty chunks of fresh girolle mushrooms, the sweetbreads filled the bill. But they did point up another curiosity, perhaps French, perhaps just L'Ambassade. Think about it. Four choices. Three fish - monkfish, sea bass, and baccalao (salt cod) - plus sweetbreads. From my point of view, a bit restrictive. Speaking of the baccalao, that was Cathey's choice. Perfection.

Before dessert, a shot glass of citrus mousse with almond slivers cleansed the palate. Then wondrous desserts. Several choices. I had chocolate ice cream in a ganache cup sitting atop a chocolate 'brownie' (but so much more) encased in ganache, with a shot glass of chocolate syrup on the side. Wondrous is just the right word for French chocolate. Cathey had crepes Suzette, an add-on of a couple of Euros, prepared at table side. Without the dramatic pyrotechnics that sometimes accompany the dish, but perfectly executed just the same.

A word about the wines. We all drank white throughout the meal, a fine, full-bodied four-grape white, primarily chardonnay and viognier, from the Domaine Castelneau a bit east of us. I think that given my menu choices, my pairings-conscious host would have preferred that I shifted to red. But the viognier gave the white enough of a boost to work with my choices and I saw no reason to change from the excellent vintage. At the finish, and in honor of our host, we were treated by staff to glasses of a sweet Banyuls from Catalan country.

And, of course, coffee.

With a bit of a gratuity, 50 Euros a head. An afternoon of exquisite taste at an incredibly low price for the quality of the fare. If you are a true foodie and you find yourself anywhere near the train station in Beziers, you owe L'Ambassade a visit.

Read more of my reviews HERE.