In an effort to have at least one post this week, please read today's post over at The Amateur Gourmet. Our host at T.A.G., Adam, discusses eating "IN" versus "OUT." I feel he raises valid points and I support his message.
Eating out is fun and social and all that good stuff (and can be expensive!)...but I often don't feel completely satisfied; stuffed, bloated and completely full perhaps. Eating in, cooking a meal at home, for my friends, is the most rewarding experience for me. Especially when something has turned out so very well.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
3 comments:
Interesting... and luckily most of us don't actually *have* to choose. I really want to love cooking more than I do, but if I were given that choice - and if all things like budget were equal - I would choose eating out for the rest of my life rather than cooking. But I really admire folks who have the talent and the passion to cook and be creative themselves, taking risks in the kitchen, just like I admire painters and musicians and writers, etc. And I hope to continue benefiting from their passion when I can... otherwise I'll have a sad life of just a few pasta, chicken and fish dishes I make myself for the rest of my days! :-)
I choose to eat out at people's homes. I have hosted a number of Brunches which is a great deal fun and could be stressful but you got to just let that go. I do not have the talent to be great cook. I can follow a recipe and be creative once in a while but that does not make you great or even good. However, when hosting a dinner or brunch it is usually the company and camaraderie that can only come from eating at a home atmosphere that makes it great.
All that being said, if I did have to eat out for the rest of my life, I want to move to Paris.
It's weird that we even have to make that dichotomy. How can anyone say that eating at home is boring considering the proliferation of cooking shows out there?
Post a Comment