Ресейлік қызмет көрсету стилі: тарих және эволюциясы

Type of formal dining
The historical form of service à la russe (sɛʁvis a la ʁys; ) is a manner of dining with courses brought to the table sequentially, and the food portioned on individual plates by the waiter (typically from a sideboard in the dining room). It contrasts with the older service à la française , based on several courses brought to the table simultaneously, in an impressive display of tureens and serving dishes, with diners plating food themselves. Service à la russe became the norm in formal Western cuisine over the 19th century. While it reduced the magnificent profusion of dishes and condiments on the table at a given time, it demanded many more footmen and required more tableware, making it an option only the wealthy could afford. It had the advantage of the food being much hotter when reaching the diner, and ensuring that everybody could taste everything they wanted from the dishes offered, which in practice the old system often did not allow. It also reduced the time spent at the table. The Russian Ambassador Alexander Kurakin is credited with bringing service à la russe to France in 1810, at a meal in Clichy on the outskirts of Paris. It eventually caught on in England, becoming the norm by the 1870s and 1880s, though in France there was considerable resistance and service à la française lingered on until the 1890s, and even beyond for the most formal state banquets. Service à la russe remains the basis for most modern Western restaurant service. A less formal style known as service à l'anglaise (sɛʁvis a lɑ̃glɛz; ) in France, has the hostess serving soup from one end of the table, and later the host carving a joint of meat from the other end, with servants taking these to diners, and diners serving themselves from other dishes.

The number of dishes (or courses) served at a meal à la russe has changed over time; but an underlying pattern of service—beginning with soup, then moving through various entrées, then to the roast or game, and then to vegetables (including salads), sweets and coffee—persisted from the mid 19th century (when this type of service was introduced to France) until WWII, and continued in a much reduced form into the 21st century. The order of dishes descends directly from the much older service à la française. In that style of service, all sorts of dishes were arranged on the table and guests served themselves and each other. As Jean Louis Flandrin has shown, the order of consumption—known to the guests of the time but rarely evident from contemporary menus or descriptions of meals—was essentially the same as the order of presentation in service à la russe. An elaborate version of service à la russe, which reached its pinnacle in the last decades of the Victorian era, was described by Sarah Tyson Rorer in 1886. Rorer was critical of this elaborate service and offered a much simpler alternative, which in fact represents the core principles of this style of service. The elaborate and conventional dinner, complete at all points, which the dinner giving of a century and a half has evolved, is beyond any but the very wealthy. Very few of them succeed in giving it, and still fewer of their guests enjoy it. Its triple triplets of oysters, soup, and fish, the relevé, entrées, and roast, a pause of rum punch to stimulate languishing digestion, game with salad, sweets and ice, coffee to close, and a bewildering series of wines, with an alcoholic appetizer to begin and end, have, however, had their effect in making many feel that a formal dinner must only follow this model from afar. So, with only the resources of a simple household, they compass, with infinite labor, oysters, soup, and fish, add some made dish to the meat, and put salad before and ice cream after the pudding or sweets. But success here, with a moderate income, is as rare as success with the long dinner at the complete table. Try to grasp the theory of the elaborate edifice which custom and convention has piled up, and see if your own resources cannot reproduce its purpose with better success. After having carefully analyzed it, you will see at once that the most complex dinner simply aims to begin with something of easy digestion, slide by some transition to the roast, and make sure that through salad, sweets and coffee, the last half of your dinner shall interest the appetite as well as satisfy hunger. You, have, therefore, soup, roast, dessert, which make up the usual dinner of thoroughly civilized people, and below you will see how, with but moderate resources, you may so vary this as to make a “little dinner” complete and satisfying in itself; more, the most elaborate meal at Delmonico’s cannot do. In Britain and the United States, fish is a distinct course; relevés are large, solid joints of meat or whole fowl, generally baked, braised, or boiled but not roasted; entrées are elaborate "made dishes" of, typically, fillets of beef or other butcher's meat (and sometimes fowl, but—apart from days of religious observance—not fish), served in fine sauces. Roasts are solid joints of meat (and sometimes fowl) other than feathered game, usually spit roasted but often baked. Game is feathered not furred, spit roasted whole and served rather simply.</blockquote>

About a third of Filippini's book contains menus for breakfast, luncheon, and dinner for every day of the year. The dinner menus begin with the "side courses", as he calls them: oysters or clams, soup, and hors d'œuvre; followed by the three "main courses": several relevés and entrées, and one roti (roast); and finally a few other "side courses": sweet entremets, ices, and coffee. Hors d'œuvre are usually small cold items (such as olives, celery, radishes, charcuterie, caviar), but they might also include hot made dishes (such as timbales, croustades, croquettes). In the French style of service à la russe, used by Filippini for many of his menus, there is no distinct "fish course", as both relevés and entrées may be of meat, fowl, or fish indiscriminately. Punch often precedes the roast. The roast can be meat, fowl, or fish (though fish is generally limited to days of religious observance); when game is served, it always comprises the roast course. Entremets are the vegetables, including salads, served with the relevés and entrées; they not as a separate course, though they are often listed as such. Sweet entremets are cakes, puddings, and such. Ices are frozen sweets, served as a separate course. Fruit, petits fours, coffee, and cordials are offered at the end of the meal.</blockquote>

"S. D." are "side dishes", i. e. hors d'œuvre. There is a separate fish course, then relevés and entrées. Cold dishes, such as mayonnaise salads and aspics, had become very popular at this time, as is evident in the menu. Roasts could be of butchers' meat, fowl, or game (rarely, if ever, fish). When more than one dish was appointed for a course (e. g. 2 Soups, 2 Fish, 2 roasts, 2 colds), the guest was expected to choose one or the other, not both. A guest might decline one or more of the courses. Ranhofer also gives elaborate instructions for the service of wine. FIRST SERVICE. With Oysters.—Sauterne, Barsac, Graves, Mont Rachet, Chablis. After the Soup.—Madeira, Sherry or Xeres. With Fish.—(Rhine wines) Johannisberger, Marcobrunner, Hochheimer, Laubenheimer, Liebfraumilch, Steinberger. (Moselle) Brauneberger, Zeltinger, Berncasteler. With Removes.—Côte St. Jacques, Moulin à vent, Macon, Clos de Vougeot, Beaune. With Entrées.—St. Émilion, Médoc du Bordelais, St. Julien. Dry champagnes for certain countries. Iced Punches and Sherbets, Rum, Madeira. SECOND SERVICE. With Roasts.—(Burgundies) Pommard, Nuits, Corton, Chambertin, Romanée Conti. Cold Roasts.—Vin de Paille, Steinberger. With Hot Desserts.—(Bordeaux) Château Margaux, Léoville, Laffitte, Château Larose, Pontet Canet, St. Pierre, Côtes de Rhone, Hermitage and Côte Rôtie. (Red Champagne) Bouzy, Verzenay, Porto Première. THIRD SERVICE. With Dessert.—(Burgundy) Volnay, Mousseux. (Champagnes) Delmonico, Roederer, Rosé Mousseux, Pommery, Cliquot, Perrier Jouët, Moët, Mumm. Wine Liquors.—Muscatel, Malaga, Alicante, Malvoisie of Madeira, Lacryma Christi, red and white Cape, Tokay, Constance, Schiraz. Cordials.—Curaçoa [sic], Kirsch, Cognac, Chartreuse, Maraschino, Prunelle, Anisette, Bénédictine. Beers.—Bass’ Ales, Porter, Tivoli, Milwaukee. At the time Post was writing, hors d’œuvre meant rather narrowly light cold dishes like oysters, clams, melon, or citrus. Entrées meant elaborate "made dishes" of fillets of beef or other butcher's meat served in a fine sauce, or some sort of pastry dish. Roasts could be of any meat, which was not necessarily roasted. The preferred dish of a truly fine dinner was wild feathered game, spit roasted and served rather simply. Dessert was molded ice cream only, to the exclusion of all other sweets.</blockquote>

In addition to the set courses, little relish dishes of radishes, celery, olives, or almonds could be set on the table as "hors d'œuvre". Wines, too, were often greatly reduced in number. Amy Vanderbilt noted in her book, The Complete Book of Etiquette, "At a formal dinner champagne may be the only wine served after the service of sherry with the soup. "); alternatively, one or more of the other courses can be omitted (see, for example, the formal menus in Simone Beck's Simca's Cuisine). Dinners in the American style often place the salad as a first course instead of soup, an innovation that appeared in the 1950s in California and was noted by Vanderbilt; in this arrangement, dessert is served immediately after the roast. Wine service may include a separate wine for each course, or simply be champagne throughout; or, most commonly, service may be limited to three wines: a white for the soup and fish, a red for the roast, and a sweet wine or champagne for dessert. These and similar arrangements of four and five course formal dinners were the norm throughout the second half of the 20th century.

Kilien Stengel, « Découper une pièce de viande, flamber un dessert du XIXe au XXIe siècle : Art, science, privilège et obsolescence. », dans Les gestes culinaires: Mise en scène de savoir faire, Paris, L’Harmattan, coll. Questions alimentaires et gastronomiques, , 2017
Kilien Stengel, ''Le lexique culinaire Ferrandi, Hachette, 2015, p. 190