>> they were outsiders to washington. they arrived in 1981. past nixon's and memoirs. she went to school on how the city worked, and what it would take to succeed. how the machinery work. i think they were much more sensitized. try legal in katharine graham. >> she did. and i is like she was the target of criticisms. a lot of these are from young woman because you represent any at -- everything you are rebelling against. charlie: certainly after her husband announcement of alzheimer's, she became an advocate of stem cell research. >> among other things. one of the other things people

missed in her era was how interested she could be anything, and how moderate she was compared to not only reagan, but some of the people around him. quietly pushing to soften his image, even before that. -- nancy played a huge role in the early 1980's topushing ronald reagan negotiate with nick l garbage of on arms control. which was not exactly en vogue in the republican party. seeley had this moderating force in the white house. by the time she gets out, and he quickly disappears from -- public view. she begins to talk in interviews on all kinds of outlet about alzheimer's about stem cell. she let it be known, through lieutenants and other means, that she was finally same-sex marriage. these are places where nancy reagan -- charlie: she had a lot of famous friends as well. >> she grew up in hollywood, and

she was not a stranger to some things that republicans had not experienced. she was able to make these use known over a long time. that is just another way that she turns out to be more influences -- influential than people realize. >> what was hurt -- her relationship with her children? >> it was very strange. in the end, there was a reconciliation. her daughter writes very president reagan descended into alzheimer's, which was such a living hell for >>. to let him she said something amazing on that issue. she said, we have so many issues and memories, that we couldn't share. >> right. patti talks movingly about how it brought them closer together. it was a kind of grieving before his death as he was lost to them. i think there was a theory, which the children have

suggested even, that they were so close, ron and nancy were so close, that it did not leave the motion -- emotional anyone else. charlie: they loved each other more than they loved anything else. >> uh-huh. charlie: and in terms of russia, as i remembered and correct me if i'm wrong -- she became a little bit concerned about president bush after he came to the white house because she thought that they might be doing some damage to the relationship that he, president reagan, had with gorbachev. >> well, that's -- true. it's an interesting wrinkle in republican history. after eight years of reagan, which he had moved from a very hard-line position against the evil empire to one which involved multiple agreements, not just in arms control but in other areas, they ended that eight years with reagan and gorbachev at the statue of liberty in like december of 1988. and it was really the triumph of detente. and what we called glasnost. then president bush came into office in early 1989 and though he would eventually get to his own incredible partnership with

gorbachev he spent the first seven or eight months keeping them at arm's length. in fact, worse than that. basically saying he wasn't even sure he wanted to do business. even as they were preparing to do all kinds of business with the russians. by then, the soviet union had collapsed, or was about to collapse and a lot of opportunity. but at that first eight or nine month period many people from the reagan era said you're going backwards, george. and though he would write that right that course it , certainly looked that way and she was disturbed about it and she wasn't alone. but he eventually found his way toward that path. charlie: there is some great quote from billy wilder maybe, but one of the hollywood people who knew both of them, and when it was first announced that ronald reagan was running for president, he said no, no, no. jimmy stewart for president and ronald reagan for best friend. >> best friend. charlie: but he later said an interesting thing which was that if nancy in fact had helped him become president, and if they had married earlier, he would

never become president because she would have helped him win all kinds of academy awards and he would never have gotten into politics. >> you know, she says something very interesting in 1968, when reagan was first -- now shiny new governor of california, and he's being talked about as a republican candidate, and about whether she would want him to run. and she remarkably understood even then about what that job does to you. and it was almost like she had some foresight that were that ever going to happen, if he would end up in the oval office, that her job would be to help him manage his job. and it's a kind of public service that is easy to forget, of what it takes to take care of the person who's taking care of everyone. and in her case, part of that protectiveness came down to managing his day and making sure he got enough sleep. and how he was eating. and resting. because she understood how he worked. and she understood the weight of

that office on him. and what he could and could not bear. and when it is someone that you love, the way she loved him, to see him in that role and what it does to him, and this is even without the assassination attempt and that complete terror that that introduced, into the experience of living day to day in the white house. charlie: and the terror of losing her husband first and then the terror of having to get him well. >> yeah. >> and she uniquely knew in the moment, just how close to death he came after the shooting. charlie: mike? >> i was going to say the or thing we forget about the reagans is that we sometimes think of them arriving triumphantly in washington as if they had just been touched with power. but they did run as a couple in 1968. and it was an embarrassing race. they decided to contest richard nixon for the nomination. and they didn't come close. and it was a messy, awkward , jangly affair. and they did it in 1976 taking on gerald ford. and they nearly won that time.

and no one was more surprised or hurt at the end of that race than nancy. there's a great scene in kansas city at that convention where he was finally admitting that it's over and talking to his most -- his closest supporters and she's in tears. she is just falling apart. because they thought they were so close. and they did come close. so by the time they run in 1980 , is they third try. -- the third try. we forget about the reagan saying those others were flukes or somebody else's idea or not really serious, although they were very serious, and in one case, nearly successful. it's also important to remember that she -- there was a lot of stuff written after don regan pushed out and he publishes his memoir in 1987 and 1988 and discloses the news that much of the white house schedule in the late 1980's had been determined by joan quigley, her astrologer. that was a shocking revelation at the time. and still kind of shocking. it probably only mattered for

the course of the year. and there were lots of times when reagan appeared on days that joan said he shouldn't. but it was a measure, i think, of what nancy was talking about how fearful she had become. about his public safety. if nothing else. i think she really did worry much more than -- and i expect all first ladies do about her husband's safety. charlie: when she left the white house she had to go home with her husband, who was living with alzheimer's, and that was a primary concern. but, how else did she live her life in los angeles when she went back? >> she lived very quietly. there were lunches with close friends. but any notion that she would have this glamorous post-white house life was completely ruled out by his illness. and she really did not want to be away from him for any length of time. at all. so it was a kind of house arrest. in a sense. of taking care of him for another 10 years. this was the long goodbye. and it was -- in a sense, his

very poignant letter to the country and the modeling that they did as a couple about her steadfastness was quite powerful and moving. and she of course became very much a champion for all kinds of research into finding a cure. >> but there was also work to be done. because he disappeared from the scene so quickly, faster than almost any president who wasn't killed in office, by 1994, is that the year? he's disappeared. the work that needed to be done was to make sure that the reputation of the reagan legacy lived on. and she oversaw and ok'd the commissioning of all kinds of books. >> and the library. >> the library. >> the central focus. >> that created this narrative that reagan had been much more intellectually curious, which is true. much more involved in the writing of his speeches. the writing of his radio broadcasts. and there came with the help of some people at key institutions

around the country a kind of revived image of reagan as a thinker. and a philosopher. that was not an accident. and she was very much -- not working the controls, but she wasn't far away from them, charlie. that was very successful. very successful. that i think there are more books written about reagan than any or president except lincoln. -- any other president except lincoln. worth a check. but i think it's really close. i also want to say in her final years, she was far more energetic than you would believe. last year, sometime, maybe it was a year and a half ago, i can't remember. on the 10th anniversary of his death, that would have been 14, they had a day long sort of memorial to reagan at the library. and i had gone out to speak. and my role wasn't very big. but nancy appeared late in the day. and made sure she said hello to all of us who had participated. she gave a talk. she was in a wheelchair. but she, you know, was somehow managing to hold it together. and did a great job. and i mean, at that point she

was well into her mid 80's and two years ago. so it was 92. so just told me she was a far more energetic, former first lady than perhaps people understood. charlie: i want to nail that down before we leave. it is this notion that presidency is such a lonely job. and so any first lady has a significant connection to the presidency. the person that sees them first in the morning. last at night. so far. if we have a female president, then he sees her first in the morning and last at night. but all first ladies have had important relationships. ingo baz -- it goes back to mrs. house -- at the time woodrow wilson, his wife. but she seemed to be a little bit different. and they played different roles. they're supportive of their

husband. they are partners of their husband. but this -- this person perhaps more in a different way, had more power. >> yeah. she was almost an extension of her husband because she could -- in a way, she could translate some of the things that even the great communicator couldn't translate. and i think that upset people because everyone thought he was the nonpareil at that -- but hard to be intimate with and in some respects was the more human side of him. and that's -- that's a big burden to bear when you have to be a protector as well. charlie: and goes back to lie next to him. in place that they chose. that overlooks the pacific. >> yeah. charlie: thank you for coming. >> thank you. charlie: thank you, mike. >> you bet.

♪ charlie: we continue a series about apple asking the question, what makes apple apple? last week we met the c.e.o., tim cook. this week, we talked to the chief of design, johnny ive. as you know apple is one of the best known brands and one reason is the design of its products. the designs merit marry beauty and functionality from the iphone to the macbook to the ipad and apple's products have long been in the vanguard of simplicity and grace. in a series of conversations, i spoke with johnny ive, the conversations began in san francisco in september of last year. tim cook had just presented the new iphone 6-s.

johnny talked about it and other apple products and what design means to him and to the company. charlie: here we are. if there's a corporation in the world, perhaps ferrari, that's so identified with excellence in design, it is apple. you build on the legacy, and you steve jobs created, have just announced with tim cook on stage presenting these remarkable products. i want to understand design. through the eyes of johnny ive. johnny: design is one of those i think in many ways massively misunderstood words. there are so many different definitions of the word. design to us. designs that it's far beyond what something looks like. it's the whole thing.

it's how it works. it's how it feels. there are certain things that are easy to represent. obviously what something looks like is very often the first sort of connection that you make with a device. you make i think a lot of subconscious decisions about the nature of something by what it looks like. you decide how you think you would hold it and how much it would cost and how much it would weigh. charlie: that has to do with products, houses, boats, cars? >> it's -- our -- i remember when i was at art school, and i had this -- now it sounds actually very naive that i could have been studying design for so long. but in realization that what we make describes us. it describes the things that we care about. it describes our values. our values, it describes our

preoccupations. and one of the things, actually the first time i came across the mac, this is in the late 1980's, but one thing that happened was i was completely seduced by the object. but then what happened, and it was the first time it happened to me, i wanted to know who made this. everything around this speaks to who made it. and it speaks to whether they were preoccupied and driven by price and schedule and opportunism and whether they were driven by care and trying to make a product that would make our lives genuinely better. charlie: it speaks to their values. >> absolutely. i think it's a very sort of succinct testimony to the group -- the company is just a group of people that get together to make something. and i think it's a very clear way of understanding what drives

that group of people. charlie: so what does this say about johnny ive? johnny: i think what it says about apple -- charlie: you work with a team. johnny: i work with an incredible team. but -- one, i think that it -- it says a lot that there's a danger, particularly i think in business. it's one of the things that of any noticed a lot. that in the context of a business in a meeting room, we tend to be much more comfortable talking about product attributes that you can measure with a number. that's -- that's a fairly safe conversation to talk about. but variety is bigger than two and nobody is going to argue that. so we tend to talk historically about price and speed. and those more emotive -- those less tangible product attributes can be ignored. and we made probably the most important decisions of our lives

in the absence of numerical data. charlie: yes. johnny: i think this says is that -- that we try to go beyond some sort of functional imperative. if just doing the job is just the price of admission. and i think that we care so much more deeply than just trying to get something done. charlie: ok. having said that, i mean, speak to me about what, for you, this particular thing, it has rounded edges. johnny: i think that our experience of this as an object is so much more than its appearance. charlie: yes. johnny: our connection with this is of course what it looks like. but what -- what it feels like. charlie: yeah. johnny: and the materials it's made from. the more that we get into the detail of trying to understand

materials, we become often fairly frustrated and dissatisfied. so that often leads us to developing our own materials. so the glass, the cover glass -- on the new iphone, is actually a custom developed material. the same as the aluminum on the back. it's an entirely proprietary -- charlie: aluminum -- johnny: it gets confusing. but there's no detail that is too small that gets overlooked in terms of the care that we'll extend. and i think -- charlie: even if it's not seen. johnny: well, i actually think that's -- one of the things that we've talked about is we will do things that -- it's hard to articulate why you do them beyond it feels like the right thing to do.

and from our experience, i think that people perceive value beyond their ability to articulate why. charlie: yeah. johnny: if you ask somebody why they like something, i truly have found that it's -- it has a relationship to the amounts of care that was extended in its creation. and it's a difficult one to talk about at the risk of sounding slightly grand in aspiration. but i think that we've found that when we care, when we design the inside of this product, that not many people will see, when we extend that sort of care, we feel that we're making the contribution to coach or to humanity. i do believe that people sense care. in the same way, i think, that we sense carelessness. we sense opportunistic products that were developed quickly and for a price. i think people sense that.

charlie: people sense that they look at this and the people who made this cared. they cared about how it felt. they cared about how it held. they cared about, you know, how it performed. johnny: yes. charlie: but it was the whole package. they cared about its functionality. but the overall impression, the first impression is the things, the tactile -- johnny: yes. charlie: the thinness of it. johnny: your experience of a product, i think, is so many of those different attributes combined. i think it's -- as you said, one of the struggles we have very often is that your experience of a product sometimes can be difficult for us to communicate if we can't give you one and let you experience it right now. charlie: you can't say it until you've seen it.

johnny: yeah. until you've seen it and until you've felt it. like, for example, the tactile feedback. we had to develop an entirely new technology because the existing technologies i think produced a sort of a buzz that really wasn't anything to do with this sort of experience that we were -- we were trying to develop. charlie: this iphone 6-s plus can do some remarkable things. johnny: yes. charlie: things that we never thought could come. johnny: yes. charlie: from something like this. the power of it. the capacity to take photographs. the capacity to take live photos. and you can see it right before. johnny: yes. charlie: and what was happening right before this still photo was taken. the capacity to -- you could make a movie with this in a second. george lucas told me he could make a movie with this.

johnny: yes. charlie: it's that good. johnny: yeah. the capability is -- it's humbling, isn't it? what you can do, i mean, it's the stuff of dreams really. if we were standing here eight years ago, and we had a product of this size, and then a list of its capability, i truly think we would find it hard to even comprehend, let alone believe that that was going to be possible. charlie: what are you most proud of in this thing that's in my hand? is there one thing? or is it simply the totality of the thing? johnny: i mean, there are lots of little details that would be so easy to overlook as -- in the big scheme not as being important but they are. but if there was one thing, it is the incredible collaboration of different areas of expertise who are -- groups who are the best in the world. contributing to make this holistic product. earlier this month -- morning we were listening about just the raw capability of this silicon that the teams developed for this product.

now, that wasn't -- we don't just buy silicon off the shelf and just perform some sort of integration. we have this phenomenal team of silicon designers who will custom design the silicon in this product to address and to provide the capabilities that -- that we were hoping for. and so to me, it's -- it's just stepping back and realizing how many different areas of expertise come together to make this singular product. and i still -- charlie: and how many years. johnny: well, that's the interesting thing is that because we're such tight teams

and because people tend to stay for years and years and years, and i've been at apple for 20 plus years. and the designers i work with have as well. what happens is when we make a product, and we launch a physical thing, there's another product that people don't tend to talk about which is in some ways arguably more significant. and that's all that we learn. charlie: and you can live with that. johnny: we -- charlie: products that to you development with but you could not solve a problem -- johnny: this is such an interesting point that i think is often really not understood in that for the things you saw this morning, there are many products that sits on shelves back in the studio. and one of the things that is -- is not -- is not obvious, is that when we're working on something new, we don't know -- we don't know that it's going to work.

and so each time you come up against something that seems insurmountable and that there doesn't appear to be any solution, you're presented with a choice in that you can agree and a lot of people would support -- support the decision that -- yeah, ok, this doesn't work and it is not a very good idea. on, but at what point am i going to sort of act we asked with everybody that, you are right. this is not going to work. and i think it's -- one of the issues that's curious is that when -- when we're copied, we understand that ok, this product was copied and these features were copied. but one of the huge benefits of following is that there's a proof of concept. people know that this does work. and there is a solution. and i think one of our wrestles is to try and know this isn't going to work. we're actually going -- we're going to stop and put this on the shelf. and it's one of the reasons we don't talk about the many things that we -- we're exploring.

because many of them don't work. charlie: but do some work later when they don't work now? johnny: they do. that's another reason we don't talk about them. charlie: technology or whatever may change, the size of things. the materials that come on stream. johnny: that's one of the things that still fascinates me. you think you're -- you think you're solving this problem here. and then you actually end up spending eight months working on something -- and because that's what you needed to solve. to do this here. you don't -- you don't get there. this doesn't work. and you shelf it. 18 months later, some fabulously type of person comes up with this solution. and then it's relevant again. charlie: maybe they see it with fresh eyes. johnny: i think so. i think sometimes it's fresh eyes and sometimes that they learned -- learned things, because of developing other products. but there's -- one of the things i think we all on the design team really love is that this

sense that how fluid this all is. so when you've tried something, and it's hard to say we were wrong, this doesn't work, and you put it aside, how -- how things are constantly changing and moving. and as long as you're inquisitive, and as long as you -- you love exploring, it's remarkable to me how we can be surprised and suddenly see something that just appeared completely irrelevant and as if it would never work. suddenly becomes compelling again. charlie: do you feel that somehow you just landed at the place that you were meant to be and that this became a place that would call on you the fullest of your intelligence and creativity and capacity? johnny: i think that -- when i was at college, i really struggled with technology. and this was in the 1980's. and that's when i discovered the

mac. and that's what caused me -- i was so -- in so many -- you see, i assumed that because i couldn't use the computers that were available to me, i assumed that they were -- that was my problem. a curious thing with technology. that if you can't use it, you assume the problem's with you. and if we eat something, we don't like the taste of the food, we don't assume that that is our problem. we assume it's the food, don't we? and so of course i thought, oh, this is me. i was technically inept and i discovered the mac. and i was absolutely blown away. and so i researched and found out more and more about apple. and thought this was -- this was a group of people that i wanted to join and wanted to work alongside from and learn.

and i was in my early 20's then. and as a design consultant, i stayed in london. and i had a number of clients. but apple was one and my favorite client. charlie: and they fell in love with you, too. johnny: we got on so well. charlie: and this was before steve. johnny: this was in the early 1990's. and this was a point when apple was really struggling. struggling really to find its own voice again. and to define its own future. and its reason for being and sadly started to look to competitors to define some sort of agenda. that i moved from london over to cupertino and still the -- some of the principals that steve established at the company's founding were still in existence. so when he returned, it was beyond fabulous. even though i had been doing

this for a long time, the -- the creative process, i'm still completely in awe. it's the most remarkable process where you -- you start with an idea that can exist with one person, and it's in your head. and you argue it backward and forward. and you talk to yourself. and then you talk to somebody else. but it's just -- it's just you and i talking about an idea. but it's still a very -- you know, it's a fairly sort of internal introspective process, i think. but one of the things that i've loved, one is that, you know, on monday, there's not an idea. monday morning is like a usual monday morning.

and unscheduled, unpredicted monday afternoon, at 2:00, there's this interesting thought that is fragile and tentative that starts to gain a little momentum. and gets more compelling. and there's something that happens in this process that when you -- when you give body as in make a model, make a prototype, when you give body to an idea, everything changes. when you can walk into a room where it's been before a fairly exclusive -- and i mean that in the purest sense of the word -- it hasn't been a very inclusive discussion. when you complete the first model down, for one, everyone looks at the same thing. it galvanizes everybody. and it includes people. and it's -- i don't know. i don't know how many times i've been lucky enough to be part of this process. and every time i just think, i can't believe how fortunate i am to be tagging along on this. charlie: because it's so what?

johnny: you look at a company like apple, there are very specific -- there are specific deliverables. there are many things we do that we can talk about with a number. and this whole process doesn't track necessary to schedules. that's not our goal. is to meet a schedule. if it's, you know, on many occasions, we've been brave enough when we think the work isn't really as good as we should do, we'll cancel something or delay something. but i think it's wonderful that a process as unpredictable and as volatile and as surprising can sit so happily. ♪

♪ charlie: mimi sheraton is here, journalist and former restaurant critic for "the new york times." m.f.k. fisher once said, "i loved everything she does and says about food." her newest book is called "1,000 foods to eat before you die."

it encompasses 70 world cuisines and took 10 years to complete. i'm pleased to have mimi sheraton at this table. welcome. mimi: delighted to be here. delighted. charlie: you are a perfect example of somebody who called and said i have an interesting book and want to make sure you see it. and then you called back. mimi: right. charlie: i'm pleased -- mimi: 1,000 times. before i die. charlie: what about 1,000 foods before you die? mimi: i said in the introduction and i mean it that it's kind of an autobiography. because going in search of these foods over a 60-year period, writing about food, it shaped my life. places i went, the friends i made. all of the things i did were more or less fitted into the schedule for researching foods like this. whether for "the new york times" or the conde nast traveler and my 16 other books out there. charlie: when did you find this

passion for food? mimi: when i was born. charlie: is that right? did your mother cook? mimi: my mother was a wonderful, competitive experimental cook and my father was in the food business. he was in the wholesale fruit and produce business. in washington market. now known as tribes. and when i go down and see the sheds and the platforms i sort of remember he was in that first. so every conversation at the dinner table was either about how something was made or what kind of fruits and vegetables came in from all around the country to his business that day. and he had strong feelings about apples on the west coast not as good as apples on the east coast because the nights aren't cold enough. he liked oranges from california. but grapefruit -- so discernment builds up in your mind. charlie: my sense isn't -- and you correct me if i'm wrong. there are a lot of good restaurants around the country that the restaurant, the quality of restaurants has grown. outside of new york and san francisco, chicago, and los

angeles. mimi: yes. charlie: all of those cities have gotten better. but in north carolina where i grew up and charleston, south carolina, in new orleans, of course. mimi: uh-huh. charlie: there are a lot of very good places. and a lot of -- interesting story of the day. i saw, the times, about how good chefs are coming to new york and making a reputation. stay here as long as they wanted to but want to go back for whatever reason to minnesota or -- mimi: yeah. charlie: i think they -- once they've made a name here, as the song goes, if you make it there you can make it anywhere. and they then go back to the place they know very well. often to bring up children and a different milieu. i know several chefs that have done that. charlie: and access to a lot of fresh food? mimi: yes. and they want to develop some of their native cuisine. i think the fact now we're more interested in regional and doing

what's local. and they suddenly feel they can express themselves there. and the competition is so terrible here. that sometimes it's a matter of being a big fish in a smaller pond. charlie: exactly. have you always eaten healthy? mimi: i don't eat healthy. charlie: you don't. mimi: i naturally like a lot of things that are good for me. charlie: like chicken and protein and -- mimi: i like bacon and i like pork and i love hotdogs. charlie: and do you eat them? mimi: i do indeed. charlie: and how old you are -- mimi: please. charlie: you are 90. mimi: and the reason i'm still cooking, kicking, cooking. charlie: yes. mimi: is that i eat plenty of

salt because it's a preservative. plenty of fat. to keep my joints -- to keep me stuck together and caffeine for the brain. i've had -- charlie: caffeine helps your brain i've got a big brain. i'm telling you. because i have enough caffeine. for three of us. mimi: me, too. but i don't watch too much. and i haven't lived like an idiot but i eat a lot of things that they would -- yeah. charlie: you exercise, do you -- mimi: no. but when i left -- when i left the new york times after 10 years of being the food critic, i weighed 210 pounds. charlie: i don't want to hear this. you eat what you want and don't exercise and look great. mimi: i own a brownstone and live on three floors of it. so i go up 10 flights at least. i walk up. charlie: 10 flights? mimi: yeah. a day. during a day. charlie: oh, i see. mimi: the door bell rings. i have to come down and let them in and so on.

but when i left "the new york times," after eight years of being the food critic, i weighed 210 pounds. charlie: oh. >> and one day i was at the hair dresser sitting in front of a full length mirror and i said i look like a club chair. charlie: yeah. mimi: and i have to get thinner. charlie: what did you do? mimi: i ate less food. period. charlie: that's what everybody said. mimi: period. no goal. i want to take off three pounds a week. i knew every time i get on the scale i want to be less than the time i was on before. charlie: old joke i like being thin more than i like any particular food. mimi: that's not true of me. believe me. charlie: you had discipline. not to look like an old chair as you suggested. mimi: yeah. well, i found the way -- i developed a mantra. charlie: yeah. mimi i'm too smart to be so fat. : and i think it's worked. charlie: do you eat with the same people or constantly -- >> i have many, many friends. so i eat with a lot -- charlie: that share a passion for food. >> oh, absolutely. >> how many nights a week do you eat out? >> four. i would say.

charlie: four out of seven. >> yeah. but not all of those are major restaurants. i live in the west village. and there are a lot of very nice comfortable places that are not exorbitant and have interesting food. one or two nights might be that and one or two nights it might be clock tock tower and upland. and there's a french bistro in new york i love -- charlie: where is that? >> on second avenue between 53rd and 54th. lamanchua and been there for 40 years. yesterday i had one of the best beef bourguignon for lunch. real bistro taste. charlie: this is what john george said about you. her knowledge knows no bounds. her glossary of flavors is ultimate. her opinion is like gold. that's not bad. mimi: isn't that nice? i like him, too. charlie: i get out of this what? mimi you get out of it several : things. you want to learn -- charlie: don't let the soup get warm. mimi: you want to learn about wonderful things to eat there's that in it. if you want to know what the world eats, which is one of my -- charlie: yeah. mimi: i had so many things i had to drop to make way for other

places in the world. i think african cooking, west african is going to be a very big influence on fusion cooking. charlie: west africa. mimi: west senegalese, nigeria. they're in loot of those restaurants now. and they could go mainstream. i think it's the next big influence. as it was on -- you should know, southern and louisiana cooking. those slaves who cooked came from west africa. and some of the dishes that i've had at africa, kine and a few other places look like louisiana cooking. charlie: do you buy into the idea or is it simply myth that there are not that many great chinese restaurants in new york city, not that many, being careful? because most of the great chinese chefs ended up in san francisco or somewhere else. mimi: i think it's true that there are not many great ones. i think more of the chefs ended up in canada. charlie: ah. mimi: even than in san francisco. canada, singapore. hong kong. michael tung who owns shen-li said it is very hard to get chefs in from china because of the rules about people coming in from china. that certainly would not apply if it's true in san francisco. because that's the united states. but many of them went to canada. they were invited.

they were given all kinds of options. vancouver. toronto. those places have great chinese restaurants. and it also suffers here from the image of being cheap food. and if you're going to have a really good restaurant, a lobster costs what a lobster costs. whether you're chinese or french. and also michael tung has posited that the frequency of takeout chinese food in the home has made a lot of people think they don't want to eat chinese food when they go out. so a lot of reasons. it is my favorite cuisine. charlie: have you ever been tempted to either open a restaurant or invest in a restaurant? mimi: neither one. if the idea came to me, i would

take a warm bath until it passed. no, i would never open a restaurant. charlie: you bemoan one missing dish from this book. szechuan mapo tofu. mimi: yes. one of my three most favorite dishes in the world. it was on my original list and when the galleys came back, i said to my editor, where is the copy from mapo tofu. i just did not do it. so i am thinking maybe i have to write a book about mapo tofu which means "my auntie's pockmarked face." charlie: somebody did a book of what you would have for your last meal several years ago. >> i'm often asked that. i would be so upset. i don't think i could down anything more than cold water. i always doubt that. those elaborate answers. not me. charlie: just some cold water. mimi: just some cold water. charlie: let's postpone this as long as we can. it's great to have you here. mimi: i've enjoyed it very much. and thank you. charlie: mimi sheraton the book is called "1,000 foods to eat before you die. food lovers' life list."

it's great to have you again. mimi: thank you. ♪

yunnan: i am here with a update of the top stories. renewed concern over global growth hits demand for riskier assets. rob material and energy shares down. the yen also halting. donald trump has tightened his grip on the republican presidential nomination with projected wins. hillary clinton defeated bernie sanders in mississippi but voting in michigan much tighter