Monthly Archives: February 2012

A couple of years ago, I was asked to contribute an essay to an online survey of "My most memorable meals." I decided to write about Zito's and to write this…

My most memorable meals would probably have more to do with who was across the table than what was on it. Get the right dinner companion and a two-fer coupon at Arby's can yield a more memorable event than Passover with Wolfgang Puck.

But, looking just at what was on the plate, I can't help but think of the best Italian restaurant of my childhood — Zito's, which was on Pico Boulevard in West L.A., two blocks west of Westwood. Mr. Zito ran the business end and Mrs. Zito was in the kitchen, whipping up a dark, brown meat sauce, the likes of which I've yet to encounter. It was rich and obviously cooked slow and long…and if I knew what it contained, I wouldn't be writing this, I'd be downstairs whipping up a batch.

Zito's went out of business in the seventies and, since then, I trek from Italian restaurant to Italian restaurant, searching for anything even vaguely like Mama Zito's masterwork. I've had some fine meals in my quest but, so far, no success in locating a clone. (Sometimes, when I sit down to plate of spaghetti in some obscure town I'll never again visit, I am of two minds: I, of course, hope the meal will be wonderful…but what if I find a sauce comparable to Zito's in a dive well off the Interstate in Jerkwater, Michigan? When am I ever going to be back there? How will I drag friends to that wonderful restaurant?

So far, this has not been a problem because I haven't found it. I've also looked closer to home and haven't found it there, either. Zito's building stood empty for a year…then another Italian restaurant moved in. It was and is named Anna's and, of course, I went there and found perfectly fine Italian food. But not like Zito's.

I asked the operators of Anna's and they told me that Mr. and Mrs. Zito had both passed away, as had the other members of the Zito family. They knew because I wasn't the first Zito's patron to inquire. Some had even (apparently) called representing major food corporations, hinting there might be Big Bucks if someone could come up with the recipe for Zito's meat sauce. Alas, no one could.

I told this story once to a restaurant critic. To my surprise, he said, "It's just as well. The recipe probably wouldn't have yielded the same results in someone else's hands." Good food, he explained to me, can be created from a good recipe…but great food is a function of the person who prepares it. In other words, the secret ingredient in Mrs. Zito's sauce was Mrs. Zito. She spent all day making it, no doubt, stirring it, tasting it, adding a pinch of this or a dash of that. "It's like painting," he explained. "I can tell you what color to paint a vase of flowers but that doesn't mean you're going to produce a Van Gogh."

I'm afraid he's right. How sad to think that Mrs. Zito took my favorite meal with her to the grave. On the other hand, I'll bet God's eating well.

Since I wrote this, Anna's has closed down and will be the subject of another post here.

Piece O’ Pizza was the brand name of a string of eateries that once decorated the Southern California landscape…an amazing reach considering the awfulness of their signature product. Do you like pizza where the crust tastes like matzo, the toppings have the thickness of carbon paper and you can’t decide whether to eat the pizza or the box it came in? If you do, you’d have loved Piece O’ Pizza pizza. Just awful. What kept them in business, it seemed to me, was their great, racy slogan ("Had a piece lately?") and the fact that there then weren’t a lot of other places where one could grab a fast pizza to take home.

Also, they served a decent meatball sandwich and a more-than-decent (and very cheap) spaghetti plate. Many of the Piece O’ Pizza stands were in "Skid Row" style areas, and I bet that spaghetti plate kept a lot of homeless people alive.

Like I said, they were all over L.A. There was one on Pico just east of Sepulveda, one at Beverly and Fairfax, another on La Brea just south of Hollywood, another on La Cienega near Airdrome, another on Western just south of Hollywood…and (I’m guessing) at least 200 more. As far as I know, there’s only one remaining. It’s down on Venice Boulevard about a half-mile west of Sepulveda. A year or two ago, I was in the neighborhood and in need of rapid lunch, so I decided to go in and have the spaghetti plate, just to see if it was still the same. Since there is no parent company now to supply the preparations, I was expecting totally different cuisine…but the meat sauce was more or less what I recalled, or at least it seemed to have evolved from the same recipe.

I probably won’t go back since I now have better places to eat. I suspect that’s what killed off the Piece O’ Pizza chain in or around the late eighties. As Numero Uno and Pizza Hut and even Domino’s spread, everyone had a better place to get a quick pizza or to have one brought piping-hot to their door. Speculating further, I’d guess that too many of their stands were located in depressed areas, which made it difficult for them to upgrade their product. It would have been awkward to simultaneously improve their menu (thereby making most items more expensive), advertise that they’d done this…but still service the crowd that just wanted the cheapest-possible plate of pasta.

I don’t exactly miss the places since they weren’t that good. On the other hand, I’ve been to fancy Italian restaurants where I enjoyed a $20 entree a lot less than I liked the Piece O’ Pizza spaghetti plate. Even in the early eighties, it didn’t cost much over two dollars…and that included garlic bread.

I received this message from a reader named Mike Schryver…

I read your comment on Prop. 8, and noted your stance that it would be better if the public voted directly to allow marriage equality. As a gay man, I wonder if you've considered this aspect of it: It's galling to have other people believe they get to vote on your rights. Imagine that a measure was proposed forbidding people over 6' tall to own property. I think that not only would you question the logic of voting on this, you'd be insulted that others believed they should be able to turn your life into a political football.

I'm not angry with you for suggesting these votes should take place. I'm just wondering if you've considered this side of the issue. None of the gains in the '60s civil rights struggle occurred by popular vote. They only came after court decisions affirmed that it was improper for the majority to limit the rights of a minority. That's where this will end up eventually, as you pointed out.

I always enjoy reading your blog. Thanks.

I'm sure it must be galling to have people voting on your basic rights as a human being. I'm assuming though that having them vote to acknowledge them and repudiate the infringers would be less galling than having them vote to take those rights away. The former would, I suspect, go a long way towards stopping those kinds of votes anywhere if the opponents of gay rights lost a biggie, which is what I believe would happen if California got to vote on this again.

It must also gall many that judges and politicians are voting on whether gays are entitled to simple basic human equality. This should not be an issue at all…but alas, it is.

America did vote on civil rights in the sixties but not by clear referendum. They voted by electing leaders with explicit platforms. A vote for Strom Thurmond was a vote for limiting the civil rights of "coloreds." And since you gave me an opening, I'll mention something here that I'm increasingly coming to believe.

Back when we did have that racial issue in this country — back when there were those still arguing for school segregation and other divisions by skin color — no one personified that side more than Governor George Wallace of Alabama. He was the guy who stood in the door at the University of Alabama in a symbolic attempt to stop two black students from entering.

Several biographies of Wallace that have been written the last decade or two have all said this about him: That he really didn't care that much about if blacks were integrated and didn't think it could be stopped. He just thought it was a good issue to ride at the time to get himself elected. He was interested in power and money…and some of those bios say that getting laid a lot was even more important to him and that his proud racism attracted a lot of ladies.

Anyway, whether that was true of Wallace or not, I'm increasingly coming to believe that the vast majority of politicians out there crusading against Gay Marriage just view it as an issue that's useful in pursuit of other goals. A few like Michele Bachmann and Rick Santorum may really feel it in their hearts…but to the Newts and the Mitts and so many others, it's just a way of rallying the troops and getting campaign donations. They used to use Flag Burning that way but it wasn't as effective.

Getting back to what you asked me, Mike: Yes, I did consider what you asked and I think it's a disgrace that there are any votes by anyone — citizens, judges, state senators, anyone — on whether a whole class of people is entitled to basic human dignity. But I also think that the sooner we get to the day when this is no longer red meat for political rallies, the better.

That will come with the mass population accepting it, not just with it being forced on those who presently have a problem with it. The courts can make it legal but opponents of Gay Marriage will cry "judicial activism" as a rallying cry to redouble their efforts. What will make the matter really go away is if those crusaders realize they can't win a vote of the people. I think.