On Saturday, November 13 of 2010, Professor Dan Montello and his wife, Violet Gray, hosted an “Iron Chef” style competition at their home on Valerio Street in Santa Barbara. Fans of the popular TV cooking show (the American version is good, but Dan and Vi think the original Japanese version was one of the best shows on television; may it RIP) know that it pits one of a stable of resident “Iron Chefs” against a talented competitor in a severely time-limited battle of fine cooking; battle is the right word, given the martial-arts feel of the original show. Each course in a multi-course meal must feature the “theme ingredient” for that contest; ice cream tends to get made from some very strange ingredients.
Both avid hobbyist cooks and fans of the TV show, Dan and Violet some time ago conceived of the idea of cooking against each other in a home Iron Chef competition. But the idea languished until they had the breakthrough that the only viable way to hold the competition at home was freely to modify the rules and procedures followed by the TV version. After all, the cooks on the TV versions are not only professionals, but they have assistants and separate, fully-stocked kitchens and pantries. Dan and Violet are enthusiastic amateurs with one small kitchen and one oven with a 4-burner range (albeit a killer Viking model). They would have to share one set of knives, pans, and other cooking tools. Furthermore, as a married couple, they did not feel like taking their dinner competition to the martial extreme of the TV show (ever notice that marital is an anagram of martial?). Besides, they still wanted to follow the cardinal rule of any dinner event they ever host: A fine meal and a good time for all is the ultimate goal.
So they did it this way: Instead of a theme ingredient, they adopted an overall dinner theme. That theme was “Indigenous American Foodstuffs.” Each course had to feature one or more ingredients being consumed by people anywhere in what is now the U.S. when Europeans first arrived (ok, the Spanish and English and French, not the Norsemen). Given this less strict requirement, no one would have to eat cod-roe ice cream, an infamous disaster from the original Japanese show. Furthermore, the theme was not popped on Dan and Violet an hour or two before dinner service—they planned their meals well in advance of the day. In fact, some ingredients were ordered weeks ahead of the dinner, and some cooking started a couple days before the event (Dan and Vi have always bemoaned the impossibility of slow-cooked delights on the TV versions). The two chefs each made five courses. Instead of having judges taste all of one chef’s courses before tasting all of the other’s, the first course from each chef was served and finished before proceeding to the next course. Although still a competition, this structure supported the coordination of courses by the two chefs, increasing the chances of a more harmonious overall dining experience for everyone. It also meant they could serve a single wine with each pair of dishes in a single course.
The judges were Dan’s colleague and friend from Psychology, Professor Mary Hegarty, and her husband, Bill Tomlin. Violet and Dan thought they would have the necessary detachment and culinary experience to serve as effective and unbiased judges. Violet and Dan’s daughter and son-in-law, Margaret and Michael Easbey, also attended, although it was thought they lacked the detachment necessary to judge, and anyway, they had their little son Michael James Jr. to care for during dinner. Mary and Bill scored each course for each chef. A commonly-used scoring system was applied: 20 points for Taste/Edibility, 10 points for Plating, and 10 points for Creativity and Use of the Theme.
The Menu:
- Course 1, Violet: Indian candy (alder wood-smoked maple-glazed salmon) with salmon roe; Dan: Oysters with green apple and jalapeño mignonette; Wine: Gosset Brut Excellence Champagne.
- Course 2, Violet: Corn chowder with lobster stock; Dan: Baked cornmeal-crusted sea bass with jicama slaw (served family style); Wine: Fiddlehead Cellars Sauvignon Blanc 2007.
- Course 3, Violet: Turkey breast two ways–with apple-cider reduction and turkey gravy and with wild-rice dressing; Dan: Chilled cranberry soup; Wine: Chateau de Trinquevedel Tavel Rosé 2009.
- Course 4, Violet: Antelope loin with acorn squash rings and kumquat coulis; Dan: Bison osso bucco with blue corn polenta (served family style); Wine: Duckhorn Merlot 2007.
- Course 5, Violet: Huckleberry cream puffs; Dan: Sweet potato ice cream with maple-glazed pecans and whiskey caramel sauce; Wine: Chateau Roumieu Lacoste Sauterne 2003; Coffee: Santa Barbara Roasting Company Dark Tropics.
Dinner was apparently a success, as high scores and high smiles and full stomachs were evident for every course (ok, the rosé served with Course 3 did not work with the powerful cranberry soup or cider reduction). And believe it or not, as Tobler is our witness, the contest ended up a dead tie. Not a contrived tie, not an arranged tie, but an actual bona fide tie. Two judges acting independently, for the most part, gave the following scores for each course, out of a maximum of 80: Course 1—Violet 80, Dan 77; Course 2—Violet 75, Dan 73; Course 3—Violet 74, Dan 80; Course 4—Violet 79, Dan 75; Course 5—Violet 77, Dan 80. Holy Thomas Keller, each chef scored 385/400 points! Marital harmony preserved for another day.
Editor’s note: Thanks to Professor Montello for providing the material for this delicious article! Dan is renowned locally for his prowess as a gourmet chef, and his public lectures on “The Geography and History of Beer” and other observations regarding the geographical aspects of food consumption are in constant demand.
