pavane wrote:
> "Mr. Wizard" <
[email protected]> wrote in message
news:[email protected]...
>
>>So you ignore the evidence that the Chef at Delmonico's called it Prime Rib at least fourty years
>>before the USDA Grading? And the fact that he explains it in his book with illustrations?
>>
> Totally irrelevant. This is like saying that if a sous-chef at Locke-Ober's in 1890 called a
> fledgling sparkling wine from New York "Champagne" all sparkling wines have to be called Champagne
> forever. Utter nonsense.
It's a lousy analogy. The name "prime rib" was in common currency well before the idea of grading
for quality or even meat inspection. It's a confusion that has stood the test of time, explanation,
and formal definition. Generally amongst a group of artificially fastidious pedants.
"Prime rib" (two words used as a single name for a cut/dish) is recognized in the industry as such.
Every meatcutter knows what that means. Every chef. Every restaurant owner. Every trade association.
The USDA. Cattle ranchers. The consuming public, most of whom don't know about meat grades (If they
did would they buy pre-packaged meats at Wal-Mart and other supermarkets?).
"Prime" grade meat (one word used as a descriptor) is recognized as a totally different subject by
everyone in the commercial chain. No professionals are confused about the fact that the same word
appears in two different contexts.
It's like goat's milk and soy milk. And coconut milk. And almond milk. And the milk of human
kindness. And the land of milk and honey. And that stuff that comes from cows.
And milking a usenet thread well beyond any rational conclusion from the sheer stubbornness of not
understanding what the people who defined all this actually said and continue to say. The
organizations that oversee the trade in beef. The government agencies that define cuts. The cutters
who have specific technical names for their cuts. The restaurant operators who write menus based on
long history.
And to further confound the hair-splitters, prime rib can also be referred to as a "standing rib
roast." Imagine the distress amongst the populace when that comes out. <gasp> Home cooks use that
expression most often (you'll have to look very far and very wide to find it on a restaurant menu)
because it's not the whole section, merely a cut from it. A few ribs, not the entire piece. And,
typically, it's called that because the bones are still in it and make it possible to stand. That's
what meat retailers call if because they know that home cooks call it that when they cook it.
Food service operators generally cook them lying (bone side) down, whether they have bones (called a
109 in the trade) or not (called a 112, but there are others as well). More can fit into the oven
and the fat cap protects the meat better. Keeps it more juicy and lets more of it be red.
Pastorio
