Rudy's Taste -- June 28, 2005 - A Night of Miracles

Just a few notes about the great meal at Rudy's Taste last night.

First up, the tamales. I was introduced to and became an immediate fan of the Guatemalan tamale. Wrapped in a banana leaf, the cornmeal was "loose" in texture and dotted with sauce, meat and a large olive (that Hammond declared "squishy"). Tasty overall, but what sold me was that loose-textured corn, which was closer to mush or grits and remedied my major complaint with the standard-issue tamale, namely the library paste-texture of the cornmeal. The Guatemalan tamales were followed immediately by some standard tamales, a clever exercise in juxtaposition that redoubled the convictions of my taste in tamales; not exactly "yuck," as these were well executed, but not to my taste at all. Admittedly a personal preference for which I offer no explanation or excuse; I know it puts me in the minority of tamale-tasters. As a sidebar: Much discussion was had regarding the inherent steamy-moistness of the filling of tamales, and how mysteriously, in defiance of all natural and philosophical law, nevertheless sometimes Aaron Deacon finds himself in possession of a wretched, dry-centered "tamale," typically offered by the street vendors with the coolers. "How do they do it? we asked; like the mysteries of the creation, transubstantiation, the Trinity and the rest, we had no answer so we soldiered on, stuffing our maws, smiling and snorting like contented ruminants (without the cud-chewing part, of course).

A half chicken smothered in a dark sauce (that strangely took those at our table a couple of minutes to identify as chicken, before hacking into it) was delicious, especially topped with the sauce and a squirt of juice from the enormous carved lemon on the plate. Once we got sorted out the need for serving spoons (Aaron -- are these dark splotches on my forehead normal, or should I be worried?), we were able to enjoy this tender bird properly. There were tostones served, I think, with the chicken (maybe they came out with another dish), but in any event they were garlicky and crisp and I found myself enjoying them, something I can't say for most tostones (there seems to be a theme developing here...).

Good as the chicken was (and a couple of other dishes I'll not go into), the two items I would definitely go back for were the red snapper and the steak. Whole red snapper, fried and cut into cubes with the head on and a face still caught in an expression of shock (a face only a Frenchman could adore ), this was really good eating, expecially dipped in the garlic butter sauce served on the side. Different from my other favorite snapper (at Dorado), this is a simpler preparation, but pure pleasure in the taste of the fish meat itself. The carne asada was also first rate, and a different preparation from my experience -- as others noted, there was a strong flavor of mint in the seasoning, or at least that's what we were tasting. Very tender, extremely flavorful ... as good a carne asada as I've had anywhere.

Dessert was a flan that I found unappealing primarily because it was actually a fairly good representation of the type -- i.e., I don't like "real" flan because of its gelatinous and dry texture (but I love the near cheese-cake custard served at Dorado, for example). Probably just my oral fixation problems acting up again; others seemed to love Rudy's flan.

Thanks, MikeG, for putting this together. As a final note, in addition to the great food, accomodating service and aristocratic company, dinner at Rudy's Taste provided an evening of mystery and miraculous occurrences. While I am sure this is never to be repeated, and you should not go to Rudy's expecting it to happen to you, I feel I should record pdaane's "miracle of BYOB loaves and fishes" -- i.e., leaving with a cooler containing twice as much beer as when he arrived. How did he do it? I have no answer, but there is a lesson in the miracle: I need to spend more time with pdaane.

JiLS

A big hand of thanks to Rudy, the real Taste of Chicago, and his mom, and his camera-shy wife, and the other gal who served us and let us take over their family restaurant for the evening.



Interesting that Jim should single out the tostones, but it points to one of the key virtues of Rudy's-- fried things are full-flavored but somehow manage not to be the grease bombs that they are at other restaurants. (The taquitos were a good example of that.) The tostones actually came with the red snapper:



Technically this "red snapper adobo" is not on the menu but since several other huachinango dishes are, I think if you ask for red snapper with adobo sauce and garlic sauce you should be able to basically get the same dish. Or something really good. Be sure and dig for the meat around the jaw, too.



Besides the red snapper, I think folks really liked the chicken pepian, the chicken Jim described, in a tart, pot roast gravy-like brown mole sauce, and the chiles rellenos, which Guatemalans make with shredded beef inside rather than cheese like the Mexican version. And I agree, the carne asada, which hardly seems like a novel thing to have at one of these meals, is one of the best versions I've had, well prepared and aided by the interesting salsa on top. All in all, a nice introduction to the subtle but clear differences between Guatemalan and Mexican food.

Here's Gary showing the kid's table the polite way to eat chips and salsa:



Thanks for coming, all, and I hope you'll want to return to a place I like a lot.

I'm on the run, but a few comments. The food looks great. I think Guatemalteca is underappreciated, and I hope that Rudy's will remedy that. The fluffiness of Guatemalan tamales (singular is "tamal") comes from the use of rice flour. The taste, of course, is quite different owing to the varied fillings and the use of banana leaves rather than corn husks as wrappers.

The comment about "real" flan being dry yet gelatinous is a little confusing. The best real flan is rather custard-y. Gelatinous connotes the use of gelatin, which is the mark of a cheap, bad flan.

I'd be interested to know if Rudy's serves frijoles colados, Guatemalan strained black beans, or bunuelos Guatemaltecos. The latter is the Guatemalan version of the ubiquitous fried dough, but the Guatemalan version is sublime.

JeffB wrote:The comment about "real" flan being dry yet gelatinous is a little confusing. The best real flan is rather custard-y. Gelatinous connotes the use of gelatin, which is the mark of a cheap, bad flan.

As Johnny Carson might've said, I did not know that! I think I've just had bad luck over the years. Of the flans (is that the correct pluralization? ) I've tried, 9 of 10 have been jello-like -- and as you say, that could very well be because they used gelatin in the recipe. Dorado's version may therefore be the best -- and only genuine article -- flan I've had.

JimInLoganSquare wrote:

JeffB wrote:The comment about "real" flan being dry yet gelatinous is a little confusing. The best real flan is rather custard-y. Gelatinous connotes the use of gelatin, which is the mark of a cheap, bad flan.

As Johnny Carson might've said, I did not know that! I think I've just had bad luck over the years. Of the flans (is that the correct pluralization? ) I've tried, 9 of 10 have been jello-like -- and as you say, that could very well be because they used gelatin in the recipe. Dorado's version may therefore be the best -- and only genuine article -- flan I've had.

I've had a lot of flan in my day and I can confirm that Dorado's is among the best I've had in recent memory.

Hey maybe today is beat on JeffB day

Jeff, I do not discount what you are saying about flans and gelatins, but there are surely "flan-like" dishes made with gelatin, panna cotta immediately coming to mind. No?

Rob

PS
Dinner sounded grand. Sorry I could not make it.

Did you happen to meet or exceed the magical number, i.e., twenty-seven?

E.M.

Yeah, although I expected us to come in well under it, with the cancellations the same dishes averaged across fewer people went up to $28.

Inflation! It's a killer!

Rob, don't apologize for your gentle skepticism. It is our way.

Truth be told, I don't really like panna cotta or most other Italian "desserts" that are not ice cream. My dislike of panna cotta has to do with that rubbery Jello-like mouth feel. Now Antonius can tell me that I haven't had good panna cotta.

For me, a very good flan straddles perfectly the line between a creme brulee and a panna cotta. It can stand up on its own, though just barely, yet has none of the gelatinous structure I despise.


To me, flan is usually bad. But when its good, it's very good.

JeffB wrote:To me, flan is usually bad. But when its good, it's very good.

Jeff, you probably would have grouped Rudy's flan among the "bad," not the good or the very good, because it was really pretty rubbery (at least the two or three bites I ate). You might want to give Dorado's flan a whirl, though, if you have not already. I remember when I tried Dorado's version of flan for the first time thinking, "I'm not sure this is actually flan, but it IS actually very good." Of course, the first part of that thought was the result of my long association of flan and gelatin. Now I know Dorado's flan (1) was flan, (2) was very delicious and (3) was very delicious flan.

JiLS