I caught Ripert's interview on Charlie Rose last night and couldn't help but draw some parallels between his whole-hearted insistence on fresh, organic and free range foods and Alice Waters' position on the same thing.
Ripert seemed careful to draw a line at not wishing to sound 'militant' (or a similar word he used), and that may be the distinguishing factor (that he took the trouble to say so). But....................... I really don't see much difference between Ripert and AW on this subject. In fact, AW is actually supporting educational efforts (her schools program)........... not that that should elevate her over Ripert, but it is true.
My question is in reference to the topic http://chowhound.chow.com/topics/603999 and all the heat aimed at AW for being 'elitist'. If you are familiar with both, where would you place Ripert on the scale AW is measured against?
Personally, I think they're both right, and have said AW should make better use of her platform by being more realistic with her message. While Rose seemed to help Ripert with some realism about the cost and difficulty of 'fresh', I just didn't think Ripert was all that tuned into that message. Does he get a pass because there can't be many people on food stamps eating at Le Bernardin? Does AW take more heat because she's more down on the level of the people who can't afford what she advocates? Do they both have something to learn? Are they both just fine? Help me out here.