8 replies to this topic

[Jonathan Day]

In December, while driving in France, I switched on the radio and heard an interview with Alain Ducasse. What follows is a summary report, constructed from notes I scribbled later on.

Several startling things: first, that the French would broadcast any single interview lasting an hour. Second, that a chef would be the subject of such an interview. And, finally, that Ducasse spoke calmly, articulately, in complete and complex sentences without a pause. His radio persona is educated, relaxed and confident, a man clear about who he is and what he is trying to accomplish.

He spoke at some length about the development of the many chefs he needs to run the restaurants in his empire. Had I not known the subject of the interview, I might have guessed that this was an executive of a top professional services firm speaking. Ducasse selects his chefs with care -- "we look for those who would stand out in any profession, leaders, people who are determined to reach the top of their metier. We want those who are always seeking to move up, not to stay in one place. And that is one reason we have a wide range of restaurants and hotels, from the very simple to the very grand." In every profession, said Ducasse, there are those who work harder, who succeed where others fail, who have a greater breadth of spirit. These are the natural leaders, those whom he seeks out. He emphasised chef-as-leader/manager rather than chef-as-cook. The interviewer tried to draw him on the hierarchical and somewhat militaristic atmosphere of a top restaurant kitchen, but Ducasse insisted that the conditions under which his chefs and cooks work apply to any serious profession.

He maintains an extensive database on all of his chefs, not only those in current service but also those whom he might want to hire and those who have worked with him and gone on to other restaurants – in the event that they might choose to return. For example, Ducasse tracked Franck Cerruti (formerly at Don Camillo in Nice) for many years before bringing him to the Louis XV in Monaco.

He described the school for chefs he has just opened, an important part of which involves bringing experienced chefs up to the state of the art in an intense 5 day process. The school brings about a complete reorientation, since the chefs work in comfort (air conditioning, good lighting, etc.) and use the most modern equipment and technologies. (Incidentally, the school also offers one day courses for culinary amateurs).

The Ducasse group's motto is "Savoir Faire, Faire Faire, Faire Savoir", which I would roughly translate as "Know the state of the art, Make it happen, and push the limits of knowledge (our own and others)" – words that could have been lifted from the operating principles of a top law or consulting firm. Ducasse said that he attempts to keep each restaurant "rooted" (enraciné) in its particular style or locality, but in each one to strive consistently for superior quality. Yet he spoke enthusiastically about globalisation and the global spread of knowledge, and he claimed that techniques he develops in his top restaurants are transferred to the smaller restaurants and auberges in the empire. This is one reason he has put a lot of energy into writing detailed cookbooks.

He described his approach as "glocal" -- a term somewhat hackneyed in business circles, but perhaps appropriate for a chef with such a widespread empire. The "Spoon" restaurants (in Paris, Mauritius, London, Tokyo, St Tropez) bring together techniques and ingredients that Ducasse has encountered in his trips around the world, "without mixing them up". This last comment seemed odd, since I thought the philosophy of Spoon was that customers could compose their own dishes, selecting from a wide range of ingredients and cooking methods. Nonetheless, Ducasse stressed the importance of not combining different culinary traditions on one dish or one restaurant.

The interviewer (who seemed knowledgeable about and interested in cuisine and restaurants) asked Ducasse how he set the menus in his various restaurants, especially in the top 3 in Monte Carlo, Paris and New York. Ducasse replied that he worked hard to ensure that the three were different in style and in menu composition. The Louis XV, he said, emphasised Provençal ingredients (especially olive oil) and cooking styles. The restaurants in Paris and New York appeal to the lovers of "international haute cuisine", cooking at the highest state of the art, with the New York restaurant using the very best American ingredients.

At one point the interviewer asked whether Ducasse had any desire to return to his native Landes. Indeed he did: the Ducasse group had just acquired a small restaurant in a tiny town in the area (I do not remember the name) whose owner was struggling and needed to sell out. The newest member of the group will price its main courses at €18; these will include confit of pork and game birds (alas, he did not mention ortolans) roasted on the spit. "Quality and rigorous execution can be applied to the simplest of cuisines," said Ducasse.

The interview ended on a seasonal note, since it was broadcast on 31 December. "This evening," said the interviewer, "many people will be enjoying a festive dinner. What would you advise them to prepare?"

"Most people will have eaten lots of luxury foods by now," said Ducasse -- "foie gras, chocolate, and the like. For this evening, I would counsel very simple foods, but they should be shared, eaten with family and friends. Don't worry about elaborate cooking, but share the dishes you cook."

* * *

Given comments elsewhere on the board about chefs "selling out" and sacrificing quality for quantity, how convincing do members find Ducasse's vision? Has he found an authentic way to combine big business with gastronomic integrity?

[Fat Guy]

Flipping through this month's Food Arts (January/February 2003, p54), I noticed that Alain Ducasse says his Spoon chain was inspired by the Cheesecake Factory. The article is about the Cheesecake Factory, not about Ducasse, by the way.

This reminded me once again why Ducasse is such a strong contender for chef of the century, along with Adria. While the others are barely catching up to 1950s-era management philosophy for mom-and-pop retail stores, Ducasse and a few other visionaries are right out there with the world leaders in any industry or discipline.

There's a sense in which many of the people who consider themselves gourmets resist modernization on account of a romantic notion of what a chef actually does. I hope Ducasse gets more opportunities to straighten them out.

[robert brown]

Steven, I think it is people like me you are referring to: hopeless romantics in search of culinary days of yore. I once likened Ducasse and others of becoming more like couturiers than traditional chefs;`i.e. licensors and being more like giving approvsl to the handiwork of others who work in the style of the master (although I think that it hasn't reached the level in the kitchen that it has in clothing design, given the internationalization and sheer size of the latter). I wonder if experienced gastronomes dining in Ducasse's New York restaurant feel if they are eating Ducasse's cuisine one step removed. Is knowing that it is, in a way, enough to make one feel that way?

[John Whiting]

Steven, I think it is people like me you are referring to: hopeless romantics in search of culinary days of yore.

I would prefer to think of myself as hopeful, rather than hopeless; and a classicist rather than a romantic. I find myself increasingly drawn to Bach's preludes, fugues and inventions.

Those who earn their living from fine food and wine, whether as producers, salesmen or critics, must necessarily pursue an upward-spiralling complexity and grandiosity. Steingarten's latest book is a case in point -- the exquisite verging on the pretentious.

EDIT: Jonathan - I should have added that I was very impressed with your reportage.

Edited by John Whiting, 26 January 2003 - 10:50 AM.

[Jonathan Day]

Steven, I think it is people like me you are referring to: hopeless romantics in search of culinary days of yore.

I would prefer to think of myself as hopeful, rather than hopeless; and a classicist rather than a romantic. I find myself increasingly drawn to Bach's preludes, fugues and inventions.

Those who earn their living from fine food and wine, whether as producers, salesmen or critics, must necessarily pursue an upward-spiralling complexity and grandiosity. Steingarten's latest book is a case in point -- the exquisite verging on the pretentious.

EDIT: Jonathan - I should have added that I was very impressed with your reportage.

John, isn't this going a bit too far? There are farmers, cheesemakers, restaurateurs and chefs who manage to maintain a degree of simplicity and balance in their lives; they live what the French call une vie bien equilibrée. They don't live in the limelight, but they exist.

Not easy to do, of course, in a time when food is increasingly valued for hype. Today's Times features an article, not on Gordon Ramsay's cooking but on his cars: fast and expensive. I am glad that he has done well, but he does seem to be more focused on the public results (Michelin stars, press coverage, television shows, money) than the means by which those results are achieved.

Ducasse, from the radio interview, struck me as different altogether. This was the voice of someone who was serious about food and committed to excellence in each of his restaurants, whether or not he spends much time at the stove.

[it aint easy being cheesy]

Why do "foodies" question Chefs hearts and interests. To reduce someones standing because they want to be succesfull or because they have grander plans than one plate is a joke. What people refer to selling out is passing off an inferior product for the sole purpose to make money. Why can't Chefs and Restaurants be looked at as any other traded art form. Architecture is a more of a comparison than painting. Everyone has this vision of starving artists as noble. Now people think of Chefs as artists and want the same "idea". Confusing sometimes. Much talk on Egullet about Chefs with multiple restaurants focus on "selling out." Can't there be a simpler answer. A trade well done has the perception of art. This trade well done can provide a livliehood. With the right public, personality, style, skill, and drive this trade can be succesfull in the traditional business since with a continual growing structure. Most 2nd and 3rd and 4th restaurants that succeed do so because the original idea was good, well done, well managed, and better than others around it. If the 3rd and 4th can maintain this through management, training, and hard work then why is it negative? What is humorous is how "foodies" want to hold Chefs above normal human aspirations.

[robert brown]

It is a good point that "It ain't easy......" raises about foodies wanting to hold chefs above human aspirations and the reasons that lead to it. It reminds me of Peter Paul Ruebens and Andy Warhol, both of whom had assistants execute their paintings. That fact doesn't seem to dampen the ardour of collectors and institutions who acquire such works. In a sphere of human activity, however, that is transitory and of less financial import, demanding diners want to know that the craftsman involved is putting his hands on the food. However, I am sure that Ruebens and Warhol kept a watchful eye on those doing the actual painting (or silkscreening). At the top level of dining, both in terms of prestige and price, what may be the sorest point is chef's charging the same amount in each of their top restaurants when they can only be in one place at a time.

[it aint easy being cheesy]

Even if a chef is in the restaurant he doesn't touch every plate! Take a restaurant Like GT or Daniel. 300 seats. Your kidding yourself if you think the chef touches your plate off every station for lunch and dinner. And sitting at the end of line looking at the food to insure its correct can be done by anyone. Whats more important as Ducasse states is the ability to hire, train, and manage effectively. Once the style of food, recipes, etc are decided upon. Would one rather eat at a restaurant where the chef touches every plate on a night where he/she is sick. Or eat at the second restaurant where the Chef has been completely submerged in style, recipes, training, etc. etc. I think the answer is clear. As a diner I want the best that I can get consistently. Whatever that means.

[it aint easy being cheesy]

And to reply to the sore point---- its only food! only grape juice!