An interesting mix of history and cooking and history of cooking, but falls flat at the end with its determination to try to draw a conclusion about what is lost and gained when you spend more time in the kitchen. [return][return]I liked the delivery of the historical information, even if it was sometimes repetitive from chapter to chapter. (Often it seemed as if each chapter was mean to stand alone.) It was interesting to learn about Boston of 100 and 200 years ago, and how cooking and available foodstuffs changed since those points. Sometimes it was hard to follow what era we were talking about - I would assume 1900 and then find out later in the period that he meant 1800, the better to explain what changed between 1800 and 1900 before comparing to present-day. [return][return]Repetition was also a problem with the portrayal of Fannie Farmer - over and over we heard about her floury sauces, her business acumen, her lack of culinary ability. It was a consistent picture, but it seemed to come across in the same words each time. But it was fascinating to see such a successful businesswoman in that era. [return][return]The last chapter seems to have been tacked on to try to give us a moral dimension. Do we judge the author for enjoying the essentially frivolous endeavor of this cooking challenge? The question wouldn't have occurred to me if he hadn't brought it up. We are also made to ponder whether we, as a culture, are better or worse off for spending less time in the kitchen than we did 100 years ago. Of course the author, someone who loves to cook, believes we should spend more time cooking than we (on average) do. This wet blanket of morality was a sad thing to add after the joyous fun of the successful dinner party. [return][return]Overall, it's a quick and fun read - a nice mix of personal endeavor and history. The recipes are made for his particular stove and goal, and most are probably not suitable for a more casual home cook, but it was interesting to see how they came together.