First off, I apologize for two weeks without Top Chef blogging. Let’s just say the demands of reality interfered with reality television.
This week, Robin’s luck finally ran out. She ran afoul of Rules A, B, and D: she made a dessert, she attempted to use a technique she had no experience with, and she blundered on as the plan fell apart. She showed up at Judges’ Table hoping to get credit for what she intended, rather than what she served.
The Elimination looked close though: Jennifer put out an inedible protein and Eli had put out a dish that was inedible, period. It’s pretty incredible to think Eli did not get eliminated when he served a dish that got the following reviews:
Tom: “The dish was a failure. Texturally, it completely failed.”
Padma: “I really didn’t like the flavors in that dish. I personally would never want to eat that again.”
Nigella: “I’d rather eat sawdust… I had to bring every ounce of my upbringing to bear to not spitting the bit I had back into the cup.”
"I don't like it at all."
You have to figure the Judges’ were just ready to be rid of Robin.
Predictions: Can I just pretend I predicted Robin for this week? I have a bad feeling all the fight has gone out of Jennifer, but I’m going to stick to my and everybody else’s guns and predict the top four will be Brian, Jennifer, Kevin, and Michael. (Note: One of these four has won every Elimination Challenge this year. That’s the most concentrated the winners have been in any season.) That means it’s Eli’s turn to go home.
Random observations
- Kevin on Nigella: “Gordon Ramsey named a turkey after her. She’s legit.”
- The three top dishes were, by far, less literally inspired by their casinoes than the bottom three dishes.
- Eli on the Circus Circus casino: “It’s not like big top, elephants, giraffes… It’s, like, not a circus.”.
- Jennifer served “shit on a shingle” in the Quickfire and “a sword in a stone” for the Elimination Challenge. She may want to consider serving things that sound appetizing.
Procrastiblog 
What I want to know is: was the quivering qualitatively different and better in the 17th century than in the 16th or the 18th? Has it been all downhill for courtesans for the last 400 years?
Comment by Chris — November 16, 2009 @ 11:04 am