Fat Guy

It's something called "judgment" that we have to rely upon, and it's supposed to come from editors. Still, to make a minor alteration to your comment, I think she most likely does think Spice Market is as good as she says it is. Which is one of a few reasons why she's not fit to be a restaurant reviewer. I see that as exactly why you shouldn't bury your readers in a pile of red herrings. Knowledge is only an effective "filtering mechanism" if it's relevant and contextual. A reader who doesn't have a frame of reference for judging the substance of a review, and who doesn't understand the realities of the world of culinary journalism, is going to be disproportionately influenced by the disclosure of a relationship between a critic and the subject of criticism. Yet such relationships are business-as-usual in many areas of criticism. The important thing is to hire critics who are professional enough to put their duties as critics ahead of their personal relationships with chefs.

Nobody seems to know -- not even Psaltis. It's hard to know what this move by Ducasse really means. On the one hand, it may be a stroke of genius. Many, many people speculated over the years that the best way to give ADNY a boost would be to bring in a big-name chef. Delouvrier, a chef who earned four-stars from the Times, certainly qualifies as a big name. On the other hand, there are some factors that would seem to be problematic: Delouvrier is very much his own man; he's not some young rising-star chef who can benefit from learning the Ducasse system and working in Ducasse's shadow for a few years. And they don't seem to be marketing it that way anyway: the Times reports "A new menu will make its debut at the end of the month. Mr. Ducasse said it would be as much Mr. Delouvrier's as his." That's very much not in keeping with the long-established Ducasse approach to one big hierarchical/delegated international kitchen. Moreover, Ducasse's comment "I'm not here enough to make New Yorkers happy . . . . So now they will have Christian full time" should be raising a lot of eyebrows. Then there's the whole issue of co-chefs; is it a workable system? I suppose there are examples where it has worked, even at the Michelin three-star level, but the recent tailspin of the Vongerichten-Kunz collaboration at Spice Market strikes me as the overwhelmingly more likely scenario in any co-chefs situation: eventually, one of them has to be number one and the other has to be number two. Or number zero. So, I'll be interested to see this all unfold. It's great to have Delouvrier back in action, though.

The thing is, although ethical conduct is a prerequisite for good journalism, what the Times dining section needs to worry about right now has nothing to do with ethics: it needs to worry about the fact that it has a reviewer in place who is creating a mess that will take years to clean up, and who is contributing (not that she's the only contributor) to the overall decline in quality (not to mention influence and relevance) of the section. I'd rather have a quality section than one that's been inoculated against relationships between its writers and the world of chefs. Hesser is a Vongerichten fan. That's a known quantity. So what should be done about it? The shallow view sees this as a question of ethics/disclosure: it says Hesser should either have recused herself from writing the review or disclosed the backstory between her and Vongerichten. The more refined view, I think -- the one that takes account of the realities of criticism in any field where the most knowledgeable people all run in the same circles -- is the one that focuses on the actual work-product of the writer: it's not only okay for Hesser to write a review of a Vongerichten restaurant, it's actually desirable if she takes advantage of her in-depth knowledge and long-time relationships in order to give us a better-informed review. Of course it requires some professionalism: it doesn't matter how much you like the guy, your first duty is to excellence in cuisine and in your writing, not to him. So if a dish sucks, you have to say so, and if that means you lose a friend too bad. The problem arises not when Hesser has a relationship with Vongerichten, and not when Hesser or the Times fails to disclose some picayune details of that relationship, and not when Hesser writes a review of Vongerichten's restaurant. Rather, the problem arises when Hesser loses her perspective. In reading her review, she appears to be fundamentally incapable -- less so than even the average Zagat survey participant -- of seeing Vongerichten's restaurant through anything less than rose-colored glasses. Three stars for Spice Market is just an outrageously stupid rating. It is completely and utterly unjustifiable by common sense or the precedents of the long-established New York Times star system. Moreover, she displayed incredibly poor judgment by acting in the service of Vongerichten's vindictive PR machinery, when someone -- presumably Vongerichten -- got pissed that Gray Kunz was getting too much press. I'm sorry, but the Vongerichten-Kunz collaboration is the most interesting part (only interesting part?) of the Spice Market story. Leaving it out can only be explained as service to the Vongerichten agenda. Certainly, the explanation the "Times spokesperson" gave to the Village Voice represents at best a lack of familiarity with restaurant reviewing and at worst deep disingenuousness: ""As they have limited space, reviewers often hang the success (or failure) of the restaurant on the restaurateur who has risked his or her money to open the doors. In the case of Spice Market, that was Mr. Vongerichten." Please don't make me haul out all the New York Times restaurant reviews where, for example at a Ducasse restaurant, the chef de cuisine (Didier Elena in two ADNY reviews, and Doug Psaltis in the Mix review) gets a ton of ink. Here we're talking about one of the greatest chefs of our time, and he gets ignored on account of space constraints? Make some more fucking space, then. Gray Kunz. Eight letters and a space. Just put it in there. I can help out with the typesetting if it's too confusing.

Phew. Because I'm never one to let good content get in the way of good self-promotion. When this first happened I pulled up the Times ethics policy on Poynter. But it was so verbose I couldn't make it all the way through. I still haven't, but this morning I did a search on variants of the word "disclosure" and didn't find anything that seemed particularly on-point to Hesser's so-called disclosure failure. Let's start with the allegation, from the Times: Now, there's something interesting here that only became apparent after reading this in light of what I've seen in the Times code of ethics (more on that in a minute): it says "The review should have disclosed that background." This introduces some ambiguity, because what it doesn't say is "Amanda Hesser should have disclosed that background." If you look at a piece of Times ethics policy that covers a somewhat similar situation -- disclosure of romantic ties -- there's an emphasis not on disclosure in the published article but, rather, to the writer's editor: Assuming a parallel between Hesser's relationship with Vongerichten and a romantic relationship with the subject of an article, Hesser's duty would have been to tell her editor, not to disclose the relationship in the review. Which means, really, if she had failed to tell an editor, the editor's note should have read "Ms. Hesser should have disclosed that background to the associate managing editor for news administration or the deputy editorial page editor." Instead, it says "The review should have disclosed that background," which certainly leaves open the possibility that Hesser did disclose the relationship, or that it was common knowledge at the Times, but there was an editorial judgment made not to do anything about it. I'm also interested in the "In some cases, no further action may be needed" part. This indicates to me that the Times recognizes the possibility of, for example, a reporter writing about her boyfriend without the need for any recusal or disclosure in print. The other bit I found in the Times ethics policy that cover disclosure are: This would seem only to apply to coverage of publishers, as opposed to coverage of someone who gave you a book blurb. So on the whole I was unable to find any clear statement of policy that, on its own terms or by simple extension, applies to a book-blurb situation. It's not a romantic relationship. Vongerichten isn't the publisher or in any sort of business relationship with Hesser or the publisher (I don't see how writing a book blurb is a business relationship). And I can't find anything in Times policy that applies to simple friendships or published praise. I mention all this because, if Hesser violated some clear policy at the Times, an editor's note would of course be required regardless of the wisdom of the policy. Likewise, if Hesser told the appropriate editor and that editor made the wrong judgment call, and a clear policy existed, an editor's note would be required. And then of course there's the question, why hasn't anything been done to Hesser or the Spice Market review? Why wasn't she suspended or fired, and why wasn't the review revoked? Surely, an ethics violation at the Times is a capital offense these days. The lack of any follow-up to the editor's note in terms of discipline or retraction lends some support to the theory that the blame doesn't lie with Hesser. Assuming there is no Times policy on point here (and for all I know there is and I just couldn't find it, but assuming there isn't one . . .) then an editor's note strikes me as gratuitous. And while I'm sure the Times hates running editor's notes, I think the Jayson Blair episode has made the editors there so insecure about ethics issues that it's entirely possible they'd overcompensate and unnecessarily tear their garments and take up a mighty wail over nothing. As for general ethics, I just don't see a problem here. As I mentioned before, it's just a stupid book blurb and we're talking about a long-time food-beat reporter who surely has some sort of identifiable relationship with every major chef in the city. Don't put someone like that in a reviewing position and then act surprised when those relationships come to light.

Dude, even though I think you're nuts, you're still going to blurb my book, right?

I was hearing the most bizarre rumors over the past month: "Didier is going to open a restaurant with Delouvrier in France!" "Ducasse is moving ADNY to a non-union location and Delouvrier is going back to the Essex House with Didier as his chef de cuisine!" "Ducasse is sick of New York and is selling his shares of ADNY to Delouvrier and Mix to Chodorow!" The real news seems far preferable to any of the rumors. This is a very interesting move by Ducasse.

I'm now more convinced than ever that Per Se handled this in the most reasonable manner. I think it's terrific that they're taking care of their diners and communicating with them on a personal basis rather than through a serious of regular press releases. I think it's terrific that Per Se is now in the process of recovering from its month of customer and media relations incompetence. Now on with the business of being a restaurant.

The Village Voice ran a piece on this issue today: http://villagevoice.com/issues/0414/cotts.php They didn't manage to find this thread, though. Only the one on the Spice Market review.

What date did they give you?

I think it's 16 tables and 2 months of reservations, but whatever the number it's not huge and it's not as though Per Se's 100 staff members are busy running pipes and securing sheetrock to the walls. Put 3 people on the job and you can make all those calls in a day. Thomas Keller has a stellar reputation insofar as caring about service and his customers. Which is why I'm surprised that, after receiving a call saying I would be called back during March in order to schedule a new reservation for April, and after the reopening date got pushed back beyond April, I never received a follow-up call. And, as far as I can tell, all those who were called were told substantially similar stories to the one I was told and nobody has received a follow-up call. And even those who wish to be proactive -- by going online or calling the restaurant -- are having a difficult time getting any information. Russ, you're friends with the guy. Maybe you'll suggest that he put something on the Web site, make a round of calls, and issue a press release. I believe all this griping will go away instantly if he just takes a few minutes to give his customers (not to mention those in the press who have championed him) a signal that he still cares about them. Then the focus can shift back to what we all really want to talk about: eating at the damn restaurant. (edit to add last sentence)

It's not a binary choice between promising a date and remaining silent. All anybody here has asked for -- and I hardly think anyone here was hell-bent on complaining until Per Se dropped the ball -- is some basic information, which could be as simple as a statement that they don't know when they're going to reopen but they'd like to reassure those who had reservations that they'll have first crack at the book when it does open. Instead, there has been an uncoordinated release of bits and pieces of often-conflicting information. An official statement from the restaurant would be virtually cost-free and would go a long way towards restoring goodwill. I also think it's worth mentioning that The New York Post is a print publication, not a Web site. And although some of Per Se's disgruntled customers are participating in online discussions, there are probably hundreds who are just sitting at home asking "Why the fuck didn't they call me in March like they promised, and why won't they answer the phone?" Per Se's failure to address the information vacuum is a problem beyond the scope of online media. There were, moreover, no flames to fan until Per Se clammed up and people started getting annoyed by the restaurant's non-responsiveness. From the Post: Again, let some of those 100 employees, who are working hard to improve their service and management skills, make some phone calls to the restaurant's in-the-dark customers.

Hey they stole eGullet's policy!

Hey, guess what holiday the last supper was on?

Welcome to eGullet, BME204. Any friend of Kats's is a friend of ours!

We shouldn't need to speculate about whether a Page Six report contains an accurate statement of the latest opening-date projection from Per Se. The restaurant's management and publicists should be taking steps to get official statements out to customers and media. Clearly, there is enough media interest here for Page Six to be running items about Per Se's reopening, and there is enough consumer interest that such reports get discussed on eGullet. So why not just provide the information?

There have been several recent instances when I've found the Post's restaurant-related content to be more realistic than that in the New York Times!

We're very pleased to announce the addition today of several new forum hosts to the eGullet.com team. Monica Bhide is to lead the India forum, Rochelle Reid Myers ("Malawry") joins the Cooking forum team, Brad Ballinger is to co-host the Wine forum, Don Rockwell ("DonRocks") will be taking over D.C. & DelMarVa, and Marlene Newell will be stepping up as forum host for the RecipeGullet as well as Managing Editor of our online magazine, The Daily Gullet. As well, two of our current forum hosts, Richard Kilgore and Sam Kinsey ("slkinsey"), are becoming site managers. Since August of 2001, when half a dozen of us formed eGullet's initial team, the eGullet.com international volunteer staff of site managers and forum hosts has grown to 45 living everywhere from Hawaii to Japan to New Jersey to a boat in the Caribbean, and in addition we have more than 20 editorial contributors to The Daily Gullet and the eGullet Culinary Institute. I'd like to thank each of our volunteers, every one of our participating members, and all those in the media who have helped to promote eGullet over these past two and a half years. You've made the eGullet community what it is today, and the future looks even better. For new forum host bios and links, please visit the eG Forums updated masthead page: http://forums.egullet.org/index.php?showtopic=33101

Tried Agnandi tonight. Daniel, I though the same thing as you -- that the Newsday review was from that day -- but it's actually from 2003. The Newsday site for some reason puts today's date on whatever you're reading. Anyway, I immediately liked the place upon arrival. It reminded me of Elias Corner in the old days, pre-decline and pre-move. Not that the emphasis is as heavily on fish as at Elias, but it had that neighborhood, ethnic, family vibe. Ellen was certainly the whitest person there -- with strawberry hair she was a downright curiosity. The woman who seems to be the owner took an interest in each table, recognized us as new customers, asked how we had heard about the place, presented us with the restaurant's business cards -- you know, all the things that every restaurateur should fucking do as a matter of common sense but so few bother with. Service, while not particularly skilled, was super-friendly so nobody minded. The good dishes were very good, and there were also some duds. My interim conclusion -- and I will go back -- is that if you can learn how to order at this place you can probably get a stellar meal. Best items: Greek sausage (moist and with an incredible orange fragrance), crushed pea spread, saganaki, cigar-shaped cheese boureks, sardines Mediocre: the salads (leaden unripe tomatoes, the lowest possible quality oil and vinegar), the 5 remaining spreads we tried (all much better at S'Agapo, I think), the souvlaki, the salmon Poor: the bacalao (super-greasy and way too salty even for bacalao), and the gratis desserts (two different semolina-ish cakes that were dry and unappealing) Overall the past few meals I've had at S'Agapo have been better, but I know how to order at S'Agapo based on many, many meals there. I think it's probably going to be worth learning to order at Agnandi. I should have at least taken Zora's advice, but the only printout I had with me was of the Newsday review.

They shouldn't be allowed to get away with it, but there's really only one way to make sure that happens: review your bill carefully before you pay it. Especially at an a la carte, mini plates, high turnover, inexperienced waitstaff place like Spice Market, the potential for error is quite high. This on-the-spot audit is an inconvenience that intrudes on the hospitality experience, but I estimate that more than 10% of the restaurant checks I get have errors on them, either overcharges or undercharges. In general, I try to correct those errors either way, unless there was a clear statement that, for example, an extra dessert was a comp.

So, the Passover plans are in place for seder number one at my mother's place tomorrow night. Looks like 19 people, 4 of whom are kids whose parents think it's wrong to tell their kids they can't eat everything and anything they want, or not, whenever they want, so they'll all just eat potato chips or whatever. So it's really a meal for 15. Ellen made the charoset from her family's old Sephardic recipe (dried apricots, plums, prunes, and raisins, fresh apples, sweet wine, walnuts, cinnamon, nutmeg) yesterday. Gefilte fish was purchased from Fairway's fish counter. The three (yes, three) briskets are in my mother's oven as we speak (she's also making stuffed cabbage!). Tomorrow I'll go over -- I'm bringing a gratuitous salad -- and assist with the sweet potato and carrot tsimmes, chicken soup with matzoh balls, and the various seder plate items. My neighbor made chopped liver, so that should lighten up the meal a bit. Dessert is a flourless chocolate cake from Soutine (a nice bakery in NYC), plus sliced pineapple (three whole pineapples), grapes, and of course the entries in the worst-kosher-candy competition. I bought the wines at Stew Leonard's (they have a good kosher selection). I think that's it.

Is he somehow involved in Spice Market?

I'll comment here and if the discussion spins out we can start a different thread. I mean no disrespect to my pal the sablefish, which is also called black cod and which is often erroneously called just "cod." It can be quite delicious. Nobu's miso-marinated black cod is about as good a dish as exists. I was mostly railing against the nomenclature problem. Nonetheless, I personally think real cod is just about the greatest fish in the world when you get a really nice piece of it properly prepared. In terms of NY v. Spanish cod, as far as I know we're talking about the same fish, which lives mostly in a band of the Atlantic ocean stretching from New England to the west coast of Europe. If the cod you've had in Spain is better than what you've had here, that probably has to do with handling and selection. I've never had cod in Spain, but the cod I've had from Chatham here in the US has been awesome and much better than standard restaurant stuff. You can get it at Bouley, for example, and the Spice Market product had that flavor and texture as well. It was a really good, albeit minuscule, piece of cod.

Assuming Spice Market works out all its service/attitude issues, yes, it's a no-brainer to say it's a very nice, high-concept, casual-clubby two-star restaurant serving a range of cuisine from dishes that would be at home in a two- or three-star environment to ones that are basically just bar snacks. And I'd emphasize that, if it's possible to use the terminology this way, there were a couple of "three-star dishes" served to us. At the same time, I couldn't help feel bad about the misleading nature of the three-star designation: mixed in among the restaurant's target audience were a few of New-York-Times-demographic types who I imagine were there on the strength of the review. And they seemed absolutely miserable sitting on those couch things in Spice Market's noisy lounge/club environment. I'm glad I ate there. It's a good restauarant for what it is, and for some people. I doubt I'll be back.

Leaving $250 on a $208 check is approximately a 20% tip on the whole bill, isn't it?

As with most hot dogs, none. "Skinless" (aka no casing) is the norm these days. But with kosher hot dogs in particuler, natural casings aren't an option because they're made from non-kosher parts of the animal. There's a hard-to-find Hebrew National frankfurter with a casing that's made from some sort of vegetable starch, but I've only ever seen it in delis and specialty butchers.