robyn
-
Posts
3,574 -
Joined
-
Last visited
Content Type
Profiles
Forums
Store
Help Articles
Posts posted by robyn
-
-
I think some are confusing Journalism proper with restaurant reviewing.
the "Dining and Wine" part of the Times is run under the rubric of the Style Section. It's clear that some here would find that to be the real issue if they thought about it. (and maybe it is....). Nevertheless, that's the section under which restaurant reviews run in the Times...and entertaining writing on the "scene" is certainly in keeping with the general focus of that Section. in other words, your real dispute should be with Keller.
Then why is the Style Section different than the Dining Section in the print edition? The Dining Section comes on Wednesday. The Style Section comes on Thursday. (At least that's what we get in Florida.) The Thursday paper also has the (separate) Home and Design section. Note that the Style Section is a relatively new section (can't remember exactly when it started - I'd guess 2 years ago or so). Robyn
-
And I'm not taking it too seriously. I am really looking forward to the next installment - is Frank "butch" or "femme". Inquiring minds want to know. Those of you in New York - what's the gossip?
Of course - I doubt I will ever take the New York Times seriously in the future. Robyn
-
What's funnier is the Bruni Digest take on this. Robyn
-
I do think there are parallels at least to the Waverly and Sascha pieces, because in those he intentionally departs from the standard review format. However, I think both the Waveryly and Sascha pieces are failures, and the Penthouse Club review is a success. To me, the fact that Graydon Carter owns a place, or that it's a scene place on multiple floors, doesn't justify a cutesy review. I also don't think those reviews were particularly clever, and, worse, Bruni comes across as believing he himself is extremely clever. The Penthouse Club, however, is an envoronment where women come to your table, take their clothes off, give you massages, flirt with you, etc. That's so unusual for a restaurant that, in my opinion, it warrants a format-buster review. If there is a slippery slope, the Penthouse Club review is not nearly as far along that slope as the Waverly review -- so at least we're going up the slope for now.
So unusual? Have you been living in a nunnery? Have you ever been to a strip club - or a gay bar/restaurant - of either the male or female persuasion? I have - a fair number of times - for various reasons. They're not unusual at all - they're all over the place. All over the world. Even here where I live in the Bible Belt (although the laws here provide that an operator can't sell liquor in a place where the women/men are totally naked - there has been a lot of litigation over whether women wearing "'pasties" are or are not totally naked ).
About the only thing that possibly makes this place different is the steaks are aged. And Alex Witchel pointed that out. So what more can you say?
I'll note that the only time I ever had a lot of fun at a place like this was at a sex show/club in Germany. Musical comedy. The climax was 6 men having sex with 6 women. The women were naked - and the only thing the men were wearing was condoms. The plot of the show was pretty thin - but I thought it was very sexy - and non-sexist. Something for the men - and something for the women. BTW - there wasn't a lot of food - but the pours were good on the drinks. Maybe it deserves a review in the NYT. Robyn
-
[...]I don't know about Bruni - because I don't know the guy personally - but - after reading a piece like this - I'd bet he has a profound sense of contempt for women. Because - instead of concentrating on the chef at this restaurant (who really does seem to be a serious chef with a great CV) - he spends almost his whole review putting down women.[...]
I reacted to it very differently -- that he was making a joke out of the whole situation, not that he was putting down women and showing himself to be a misogynist.
I hope he is equally funny when he reviews his first gay bar/restaurant. They're a lot funnier than strip clubs. Robyn
-
Frank Bruni didn't open a steakhouse in a strip club. He's a journalist who reviews restaurants. If someone opens a steakhouse in a strip club, you can either ignore it or review it. Given that the chef worked at Daniel, Le Cirque, et al., and is also a competitive barbecue champion (and also happened to be the roommate of my best friend in law school), and that there seems to be an ambitious (by the standards of steakhouses) culinary program in place, reviewing it seems to have been the journalistically responsible move.
For the record, I agree 100% with FG.
I don't recall anyone saying the restaurant shouldn't have been reviewed.
I don't know whether anyone said it or not. But I'll say it. This place got a long features article in the Dining Section 3 years ago - written by someone who knows about food. It stated that the steaks were very good. That's probably more NYT coverage than the place deserved. Robyn
-
I hate to be in the position of defending Bruni, whom I don't think is a good food critic, but to be fair to him, that's what he's done by and large.
I wrote earlier about that New York Magazine list of "power" gays and lesbians that he was on. The only reason I remember Bruni's being on it was that it was such a surprise. Everyone else listed from the Times was what you might call a "professional gay" -- people like Adam Moss, Ben Brantley, Anthony Tommassini, and Herbert Muschamp -- and then there was this guy who was a famously competent political reporter, who to all apperances hadn't made his sexual orientation an issue. Yet, he wasn't hiding it. I found that admirable. And remembered it.
As for this piece, though, how could a gay male write a review of a restaurant in a strip club and not deal with issues of his sexual orientation, at least implicitly? It wouldn't be honest.
Alex Witchel is a (presumably) straight married woman - and she managed to write about the place primarily in terms of the chef and the food. There was a nod to the fact that the place is a strip joint - but it wasn't the primary focus of the article. As it could have been. There aren't many women who are thrilled with venues like this - and she could have written a feminist diatribe instead of the piece she wrote. But she didn't.
As for Bruni being famously competent as a political reporter - I don't know the whole story - but I always wondered why the NYT pulled him out of the Rome bureau. Robyn
-
The problem is the Times is trying desperately to compete with the internet, other papers and publications. It can do this by being a standard bearer for journalism or it can attempt to out do these other outlets by being more "snarky" and "clever" and hip.
It was once an "elite" publication because it set standards and adhered to them and people respected the paper. Now it is "elite" because it is taking on an "elitist" stance as a paper for those who are hip and in the know. Pinch has combined his mis guided multicultural we can change the world view with if you can't beat em join em and the results are scandal and embarrassment, lost credibility and circulation. In the battle with National Inquirer and People and the the blogs it will ultimately lose.
Instead of challenging other news outlets with its quality it is descending to their level.
I've read your messages - and agree with them.
The problem is that the NYT will never be clever and hip - at least not clever and hip enough to satisfy those people who are looking for these things. I read an awful lot (serious and non-serious stuff) - but if I can't go to the NYT for serious journalism - I'll just drop it - because - even though I'm an upper middle class 60 year old woman (typical NYT reader demographics these days) - I'll never think of the NYT as among my top 10 reads for clever and hip when it comes to anything I like to keep track of (whether it's techno-gadgets or architecture). Even the Personal Journal in the WSJ is higher on this totem pole.
Note that unlike some people here who read the NYT on line for free - or at cheap New York prices - I pay about $400/year for outside New York home delivery - for 6 days a week - no Sunday paper. It would be about $600/year including the Sunday paper - but I don't have the time to slog through 5 pounds of newsprint on Sundays. Don't know how many people there are like me - but I suspect we are a substantial source of revenue for the company.
It's kind of a Walmart problem in reverse. When Walmart tried to upscale - the last couple of years - it didn't attract more upscale customers and it alienated its base. Robyn
-
I'm not sure what's meant by "makes a difference" but the fact that Bruni is gay is certainly relevant to the review in several ways. He introduces several elements of gay code, so he certainly seems to think it's relevant that he's gay. Also, you have at least one clueless blogger railing against Bruni's misogynism, which of course becomes a ludicrous claim when placed in context...
There are gay guys who love women - others who hate them - and some who don't care. Just like with straight guys. I've met at least a handful of haters whose names you'd recognize (they're not famous - but you'd recognize the names). As a woman - well you develop a sense of "gaydar" about this. And those guys make me feel very unwelcome - and very uncomfortable. Same way I feel in the company of straight men who dislike women.
I don't know about Bruni - because I don't know the guy personally - but - after reading a piece like this - I'd bet he has a profound sense of contempt for women. Because - instead of concentrating on the chef at this restaurant (who really does seem to be a serious chef with a great CV) - he spends almost his whole review putting down women. I compared his piece with the earlier NYT piece - and the contrast is rather striking.
And who knows what other emotional baggage he's carrying around? Maybe he hates good looking macho straight guys? And he takes it out in his reviews. Who can trust him at this point?
Remember - as you pointed out - he was the one who dragged the issue of his sexual orientation into his job. No one else but him. There are a large number of homosexuals who keep their sexuality to themselves and friends - not because of shame - but because they don't want to be known as a great gay woman writer - or a great gay male surgeon. They want to be judged on the basis of their skills - they want to be known simply as a great writer - or a great surgeon - not their sexual orientation. Lacking serious skills as a good critic (at least IMO) - it seems like Bruni is playing to the "cheap seats". Robyn
-
Since sexual orientation and gender identity has become so important in this thread, it should be noted that Alex Witchel isn't a "he".
(She's also not really a food writer, but I'll anticipate oakapple in saying that if she cares more about food than the lead restaurant reviewer, you've really got to wonder.)
For someone who's not a food writer - she writes an awful lot in the Dining Section of the NYT. Just look at the archives. And she's been around the New York Times for quite a while (and is also married to Frank Rich). Robyn
-
I wanted to see what other food critics had said about Robert's Steakhouse. So I looked it up - and - lo and behold - the NYT did write up the place at length in 2003: Steak and Shake Takes on a Whole New Meaning.
Anyone have anything to say about repeating coverage of this restaurant? I found the first article a lot more tasteful - and informative. The writer was more interested in the food and the chef than the T&A.
Haven't read all the messages in this thread yet - so I apologize if someone has already pointed this out. Robyn
-
There was some list in (I think) New York Magazine years ago -- before Bruni was the restaurant critic -- of powerful out gays and lesbians in New York. There was a sublist of people at the Times, and then political reporter Bruni was on it.
This was years ago.
(I want to emphasize that this wasn't a list outting people. It was a list of people who were already out. I think it was tied to Gay Pride Week or something.)
I think it's probably more accurate to say that although Bruni's orientation was common knowledge among those of us who were paying attention...as well as among those who keep tabs on that stuff in general (which I'm not one of), this is the first time it's essentially explicitly come up in a restaurant review written by Bruni (there have been hints before).
edit: The only reason that I can think of why any of this matters at all is that it does provide a foundation for the humor evinced in today's review....I suppose it is a necessary basis for the joke. As for the more important matter of the food at Robert's...Bruni's not alone in his opinion that the steaks are superb....I've heard that since it opened over three years ago. (heck, the best steakhouse for years in South Florida was in a strip club)
This is a pretty accurate description (in terms of the gay community). It is one thing to "come out" within the gay community - and another to do it in terms of the world in general in a place like the New York Times. Some people do it voluntarily - others like Mark Foley - involuntarily.
Actually - a lot of the jokes are "inside" gay community jokes - like the stuff about Mahogony (the movie - the song - Do You Know Where You're Going to - and Diana Ross' role in that movie being an iconic male gay community role - kind of like Judy Garland).
And all of this matters because if you get involved in any of the arts - or music - or design - it's important to know the players in the gay community. Who's on first - the big fights - the petty grievances. The bitchy bitchy gossip. Because the gay community generally sets the rules in these areas. Read the reviews of Cameron Carpenter - the most flamboyantly gay concert pipe organ player these days - in the NYT - bitchy bitchy. But he's great. I'll be seeing him for the third time in a couple of weeks. Anyway - I guess that Bruni is breaking ground in terms of explicitly bringing restaurant criticism within the realm of other "arty" areas.
Doesn't bother me a bit that he's gay. I'm involved enough in areas like art and design and music not to give sexual preference a second thought. It's just that this review - at least IMO - was a tacky waste of front page restaurant space. And insulting to women to boot (there are gay guys who truly like women and working with them - others who don't - my initial impression is that Bruni falls into the latter category). Like Gridskipper said - the guy doesn't have any taste at all. I will trust all my gay design friends to pick out things for my house - but I don't think I'd trust this guy to pick out a good restaurant that most people would enjoy. Too bad. Waste of a "coming out" party. Robyn
-
oh g---d, someone couldn't play a better stereotype of the "feminazi with no sense of humor" then this one:
http://www.nyu.edu/classes/siva/archives/004018.html
(is she really so ignorant that she thinks Bruni writes the captions on the slideshow?)
There are quite a few people who don't have a sense of humor about this kind of stuff - including the writer on Gridskipper (a good travel site): Bruni Goes To The Penthouse Club To Eat the Meat.
Actually - the part I like best in the piece is where they say the guy has no taste. He's lucky he became a restaurant critic and not an interior designer. Robyn
-
I'm just outraged. I don't understand why this guy gets to keep his job. Can anyone offer a defense for this review? Is there a steak anywhere that's so sublime that I'd be willing to share my dining time and my table with Mahogany or Brianne?
Susan - You don't understand. It's just so fall on the floor funny for a bunch of gay guys to go to a strip club - and then stick cute little remarks into the review like "[w]e were...less susceptible to the scenery than other men might be...". Isn't it
? You do know Frank Bruni is gay - yes? And we both know a straight guy would get his head handed to him for doing this. RobynI didn't know if he is or isn't, and didn't pick up from the review anything that would indicate one way or another. Frankly, I don't care.
There are places like this in New York. People go there, sometimes for the food, sometimes for the atmosphere. It's no big deal.
You may be the only person reading the review who didn't pick up on it. Indeed - this is viewed as Bruni's "coming out" review in the gay community. There is also a lot of angry feminist reaction - as well as various other reactions (see links in previous cite). Indeed - the sexual tenor of the review and the reactions to it seem to be the most important things about it (distant second seems to be comparisons to the Chodorow review). Robyn
-
I'm just outraged. I don't understand why this guy gets to keep his job. Can anyone offer a defense for this review? Is there a steak anywhere that's so sublime that I'd be willing to share my dining time and my table with Mahogany or Brianne?
Susan - You don't understand. It's just so fall on the floor funny for a bunch of gay guys to go to a strip club - and then stick cute little remarks into the review like "[w]e were...less susceptible to the scenery than other men might be...". Isn't it
? You do know Frank Bruni is gay - yes? And we both know a straight guy would get his head handed to him for doing this. Robyn -
Not really. The opera fans jump all over the critics when they think a review is wrong, and there are no stars for opera reviews. Frank Bruni's errors would still be errors, whether there are stars at the bottom of the review or not.If the stars are ignored and the reviews stand on merit, then this conversation is moot.Edit: Come to think of it, some of Bruni's reviews have indeed been controversial for the stars, and no other reason. If the Times had no stars, then the Sripraphai review would have come across as just a rave review about a Thai restaurant in Queens, without anyone arguing about whether it "deserved" two stars. But for those who think Bouley is a great restaurant, Bruni's smackdown would have still been a low blow, with or without *** at the bottom.
Rich may be in the process of converting me when it comes to stars. Precisely because of the arts analogy.
We saw Savion Glover this weekend (we last saw him in New York in Bring in Da Noise, Bring in Da Funk - maybe almost 10 years ago). He's fabulous. I don't know if he's the greatest tap dancer who will dance during my lifetime - but if he isn't - he's one of the top 3. How do you compare what he does to opera - to symphony orchestras - to ballet? Perhaps he has off nights (although this wasn't one of them). What do you do then? I read back through all the reviews of the show I saw. None has a "star rating" - but - if I had read them before I bought tickets - all would have encouraged me to go.
Perhaps when it comes to restaurants - all we need is: 1) basic information (meals served - hours - etc.); 2) the nature of the restaurant and the food it serves; and 3) how good the place is in terms of accomplishing what it's trying to do. Awarding stars when you're reading about everything from BBQ or noodle places to the best haute cuisine restaurants in the world - well maybe it just doesn't make sense. Robyn
-
Graydon Carter owns the Waverly Inn, not Little Owl.
Yes - mea culpa. Gin will muddle the brain.
Note that I do like Graydon Carter because he keeps getting arrested (or getting citations - whatever) for smoking in his office
. Robyn -
I'm not going to answer for Nathan (he's pretty good at doing that himself), but I do have an observation.Nathan - I don't mean this as an ad hominem remark - but simply as a question. Don't expect an answer. Just think about it. When you get a little older - and have your lots of money - is this the way you want to live - waiting on line to get into the new hot place...? I personally don't think this is a civilized way to live - or dine.I cannot foresee the death of great restaurants that: A) take reservations; B) have serious wine lists; C) have luxurious service; D) serve top-notch food. Any critic who insists on using adjectives like "fussy," "effete," "starchy," "self-conscious," "[in]accessible," "ritual[istic]," "preening," "vain," or "highfalutin" to describe that kind of restaurant is in the wrong job.
And any critic who insists a generational shift has taken place, and that "savvy" diners (as a category) no longer are interested in such things, is totally out of touch. I would add (in case it is not obvious) that the opposite critic would be no good either.
I agree.
Guess it's just a question of Bruni attempting to impose his prejudices on the New York dining scene. There's a time and a place for all kinds of restaurants - and eating IMO. But that's a different issue than defining the role of the New York Times restaurant critic. Is his weekly review supposed to be like a blog - what I ate this week and what I liked or didn't like - or something more important? I don't think Bruni is the only questionable newspaper restaurant critic in the US - he's just the most visible. I can understand that happening in my home town paper - where the restaurant critic is probably an unpaid volunteer - but it is less forgiveable in a major metro area.
My husband and I travel a fair amount - and I have found it increasingly difficult over the years to find places I like relying on newspaper reviews - or even the Michelin guide. Curiously - we had excellent eating in Japan - where I couldn't (due to language barriers) do hardly any research on my own. Just relied on concierge and friend recommendations - walking around a neighborhood and eyeballing places at meal times - and reading an English website on dining in Japan written by an American ex-pat.
Perhaps this would be a decent way for a tourist to approach dining in New York these days? What do you think? Robyn
-
Little Owl - Graydon Carter - integrity. What is this - a test of which words don't belong in the group
? You can insult south Florida all you want - I don't live there these days. Haven't for over a decade. (Although I do respect some of the business people I met there during the years I lived there - for reasons having nothing to do with their dining habits - others - of course - were idiots.) As for downtown New York - it got a lot less interesting to me when the artists I knew there made more money on their real estate than they had ever made on their art and moved elsewhere.FWIW - I guess these same people are the ones fighting over beach and pool chairs at fancy resort hotels (along the lines of the article in this weekend's WSJ). Nathan - I don't mean this as an ad hominem remark - but simply as a question. Don't expect an answer. Just think about it. When you get a little older - and have your lots of money - is this the way you want to live - waiting on line to get into the new hot place and fighting for a chaise near the pool? I personally don't think this is a civilized way to live - or dine. Don't think it now - didn't when I was 25 (when there was a hot disco I wanted to go to when I was 25 - I always figured out who to "grease" to get in - I was never one to wait behind a "velvet rope"). These days - well - if my reservation isn't enough - I'm not willing to go further. It is food for thought.
BTW - what do you think of Frank Bruni's attitudes toward restaurants insofar as they are affected by his friends - his "social crowd" - the people he hangs out with when he dines. Do you think that affects his POV? I do. Combine his friends - and the relatively traditional dining experiences he probably had during his years in Italy - and well - that's what makes Frank Bruni the kind of restaurant "critic" he is. Robyn
see here's the problem...you're awfully opinionated about a city that you're not very familiar with (not anymore anyway). almost everything creative and interesting being done today in food, fashion, art, dance and music in NY (excepting ballet and classical/jazz -- my personal preferences actually) is downtown or in Brooklyn. literally.
but anyway..the fact that you would confuse Graydon Carter and the Little Owl is just embarrassing (since you're so opinionated about the topic). furthermore, um, no, none of us have any interest in waiting at velvet ropes...that's a mug's game.
the last thing in the world that Little Owl, Degustation, Ssam Bar, etc. are, are "velvet rope" places.
(edit: put differently, there aren't too many people from NY waiting outside of those velvet rope joints....)
I'm a lawyer too, I have the same tendency to talk like an authority on everything, but I'm not going to claim to have the slightest clue what the habits are of a different generation than mine own in Tampa.
Ah - mea culpa. That's what happens when I write a message after a martini or two. Remember Dorothy Parker - and what she said about martinis. More or less. I like them - two at the very most. Three and I'm under the table. Four and I'm under my host.
Still - you didn't answer my questions.
And I don't have the slightest clue about dining in Tampa either (go to New York more often than Tampa - haven't been in Tampa for over 10 years). Robyn
-
with all due respect, you have no clue what you're talking about. young i-bankers is exactly what I know...and some of them are waiting for two hours for a table at Little Owl like anyone else (and no amount of money will ever get you to jump the line there...they have too much integrity for that)....or even lining up at Tartine with a bottle of wine just like anyone else.
frankly, I don't think you understand downtown Manhattan at all.
edit: btw, having lived in South Florida, I completely agree that no one making 5 million there would ever wait in line anywhere...but then most people there make L.A. denizens look substantive and cerebral.
Little Owl - Graydon Carter - integrity. What is this - a test of which words don't belong in the group
? You can insult south Florida all you want - I don't live there these days. Haven't for over a decade. (Although I do respect some of the business people I met there during the years I lived there - for reasons having nothing to do with their dining habits - others - of course - were idiots.) As for downtown New York - it got a lot less interesting to me when the artists I knew there made more money on their real estate than they had ever made on their art and moved elsewhere.FWIW - I guess these same people are the ones fighting over beach and pool chairs at fancy resort hotels (along the lines of the article in this weekend's WSJ). Nathan - I don't mean this as an ad hominem remark - but simply as a question. Don't expect an answer. Just think about it. When you get a little older - and have your lots of money - is this the way you want to live - waiting on line to get into the new hot place and fighting for a chaise near the pool? I personally don't think this is a civilized way to live - or dine. Don't think it now - didn't when I was 25 (when there was a hot disco I wanted to go to when I was 25 - I always figured out who to "grease" to get in - I was never one to wait behind a "velvet rope"). These days - well - if my reservation isn't enough - I'm not willing to go further. It is food for thought.
BTW - what do you think of Frank Bruni's attitudes toward restaurants insofar as they are affected by his friends - his "social crowd" - the people he hangs out with when he dines. Do you think that affects his POV? I do. Combine his friends - and the relatively traditional dining experiences he probably had during his years in Italy - and well - that's what makes Frank Bruni the kind of restaurant "critic" he is. Robyn
-
Let's face it - people who earn millions of dollars a year (whether they're 30 or 50 or 70) - and there are a lot of them in New York - aren't going to wait in line for an hour for anything.
I disagree with pretty much 100% of your post, but perhaps most with this statement. Perhaps you don't deal with any young, wealthy New Yorkers, but I do all the time, and I can assure you that your personal preferences, no matter how strongly held, don't neatly project on to them as a group. Sure, some wealthy people are too impatient to wait for a table -- some poor people are too impatient too. But plenty of millionaires are are just fine with it. We're not talking about standing on line with a black hood and handcuffs on. If you go to Upstairs you can wait in the market or downstairs. You can have a cocktail while you wait. You can talk to the people you came with, or you can flirt with other waiting customers. You can conduct business on your Treo. You can send one person ahead to get on the waiting list and the rest of the group can show up later on. At a lot of places where they make you wait for tables, they'll even take your cell number and call you, so you can go to a nearby bar and hang out. Not to mention, most places have informal ways for regulars to make fake reservations, in other words they'll put you at the front of the line. And even if you wait 30-45 minutes for a table at one of these places you're still in and out in less time than at a fine-dining restaurant. I assure you, there are plenty of millionaires dining at Upstairs. I know one who ate there two days ago -- and she's in her fifties. Plus, plenty of people wait half an hour for tables at fine-dining restaurants where they have reservations -- it happens all the time. People wait.
A millionaire - they're a dime a dozen these days - is quite a bit different than the investment banker who's making $5 million a year. I would believe that a person like that had a "fake reservation" - but not that that person would wait on line for an hour under any circumstances. BTW - under the category of "fake reservations" - do you also get situations where the right amount of money in the right hands will take you "to the head of the line"? That seems to work in various restaurants in various parts of the world. Whatever - I'm sure that there is an updated version of "Fully Committed" lurking there.
For those of you unfamiliar with Fully Committed - it was an off Broadway show about reservations and seating in a very popular restaurant - doesn't sound like much meat for a show - but it was hilarious. Robyn
-
For those who may think that dining trends have undergone a singular shift recently, here's a curative quote from Bryan Miller in the Times:
He wrote that in 1991, sixteen years ago. I visited La Grenouille earlier this week, and it is pretty much the same as he found it then. The difference, of course, is that Miller didn't have it in for luxury dining, the way Frank Bruni does.If you listen to some restaurant-industry pundits, La Grenouille is just the type of expensive, opulent institution that is slated for extinction as ineluctably as the dinosaurs. In this era of austerity and a return to more ingenuous foods, they say, the dining public is turning away from haute cuisine and embracing little pizzas, pasta, coq au vin and grilled chicken.So welcome to La Grenouille, Tuesday night, mid-January, traditionally the slowest time of the year for restaurants. The dining room is as packed as Bloomingdale’s during a post-holiday clearance.
If La Grenouille is packed, it's because there used to be twenty or thirty restaurants just like it and now there are two or three (La Grenouille, Le Perigord, and . . . ?). So all the demand for that kind of experience is now concentrated in less than 10% of the seats.
I'm not sure how Miller's quote is relevant. Restaurants like Upstairs and Momofuku are not "turning away from haute cuisine and embracing little pizzas, pasta, coq au vin and grilled chicken." What they serve is best thought of as haute cuisine loosed from its historical moorings: first, because it's served in such a casual setting; second, because it incorporates haute cuisine (or the non-Western equivalents) techniques but not necessarily luxury ingredients or formal platings.
I don't believe there were restaurants like this back in the day. I'd be interested to hear of some examples. But they seem like a distinctly contemporary phenomenon.
I think there are newer places that fit the bill for the upper east side crowd (and similar crowds who live in other parts of the city). Don't know what's around today - but DB&D did when I was there in 2004. Let's face it - people who earn millions of dollars a year (whether they're 30 or 50 or 70) - and there are a lot of them in New York - aren't going to wait in line for an hour for anything.
As for the "haute cuisine loosed from its historical moorings" served in casual settings - New York was more than a little late to the party. Places like Chinois on Main in Santa Monica (which has been open for almost 25 years) were doing things like that decades ago (and Puck was well beyond little pizzas at that point). So were Norman Van Aken and Mark Militello in south Florida (they both started in the 80's).
Makes sense. California and south Florida have always been casual places. No one gets dressed for dinner. New York wasn't casual (and still isn't to a large extent). Like London and Tokyo - it's one of the few places my husband will pack a suit and tie for - just in case. California and south Florida have people with money who like to dine - and it's silly to think that every great creative chef in the world started in or wound up in New York. Heck - everyone made a big fuss about Doug Rodriguez when he arrived in New York - but he did his earliest and maybe his best work in Coral Gables.
And these are just 2 areas I'm pretty familiar with. I'm sure people who've traveled to or lived in other places over the years have similar stories (I was only in Hawaii once - but I remember similar places there over a decade ago).
Let's face it - in a lot of ways - New York has been an importer of food trends for quite a while - not an exporter. Things like Asian Fusion - Caribbean Fusion - Floribbean - even high end Japanese - whatever - didn't start in New York. Although they wound up there eventually. Robyn
-
here's the thing....my perception is that there was a time, not so long ago, when there were two kinds of restaurants in NY....fine dining...continental inspired or haute French, and everything else (mainly cheaper ethnic places)...
Not so long ago = what? Twenty or thirty years? Robyn
-
We popped in and took a look at the restaurant while we were up there. It does have a tasting menu. Ask to take a look at it next time you're there. Robyn
Bruni and Beyond: NYC Reviewing (2007)
in New York: Dining
Posted
You can accuse me of a lot of things - but being homophobic isn't one of them. Perhaps I just live in a more conservative (although not backwards) part of the world - where being homosexual is just part of who you are - not something to be hidden - or flaunted. E.g., our local design magazine just featured a (very nice looking) house built and occupied by one of my brokers - and "his partner". I didn't know the guy was gay. And I've been his client for almost a decade. Nor had I ever thought about it one way or the other. All I knew or cared about - both before and after reading the article - is that I got good prices and good service from him. Ditto with other (gay) professionals I've dealt with (whether they're doctors or designers or golf instructors - I've dealt with gay people in all those categories - and more). *The most important thing is competence.* I once ordered flowers from a gay florist here. Worst arrangement I ever saw. Needless to say - I never used him again.
BTW - the way you usually find out that people you know here are gay is when you meet them in the grocery store - or at restaurants - and they introduce you to their partners. It's all pretty laid back.
I doubt my husband and I will ever have close social relationships with gay couples - but - then again - we won't have close social relationships with born again Baptists either. Not enough in common. On the other hand - when my husband was training for marathons - his running partner was a gay guy. Mostly because they had similar running backgrounds - and training goals.
On an unrelated issue - I may rethink what I said about the "star system". I just got the 2007 Michelin Guide to Germany. It is written in German (there's no English language edition). Without the stars - the little knives/forks - etc. - I wouldn't have a clue. I guess I could use an English guide like Fodor's - but there you're taking about listings of hundreds of restaurants - instead of thousands. Of course - the Michelin system is a lot different than the NYT system. Robyn