top chef : discuss
i love checking my email after top chef nights- everyone gets so worked up over the show. my thoughts on last night's part one finale: i love harold. gross white v-necks and all. i'm glad tiffani is still in. i know she didn't nail her audience every time, but she showed more fine dining capability than dave did, although i really do appreciate dave's his passion. (but yes, i agree it was unfair that they cut dave even though he won more challenges than tiffani). i sort of have this thing that dave shouldn't be there anyway. it should be lee anne. hands down. (ps: have you seen stephen's website??)
that said, i have this essential dilemma with the show: i assumed the show was about celebrating chefs who work in the "fine dining" area (meaning not your standard dave nacho fare) because that seems to be how the show billed itself. but with all these guest judges who don't necessarily have a background in fine dining (phil f-ing hellmuth?) swaying votes kinda bugs me. i've started to side with harold on the whole not wanting to cook junk food and focus on fine dining thing. seems a bit snobby when it means you have to cut nice people like dave, but i love seeing creative chefs elevate food beyond the standard fare. ok, enough me- what do you think? are the top two the right top two?
[and ps: where is harold's restaurant? i want to eat there. now.]
[UPDATE: ac just called with a harold sighting. he was in the meatpacking district with the same girl from dinner. def not a single guy ;)]