Nathan

With all due respect, I'm going to have to question the reading comprehension of several posters above. I just re-read Bruni's review. There were three paragraphs that did not concern individual dishes at Ssam Bar. The first noted that Bruni was jumping on the Ssam Bar bandwagon. The second stated: "By bringing sophisticated, inventive cooking and a few high-end grace notes to a setting that discourages even the slightest sense of ceremony, Ssam Bar answers the desires of a generation of savvy, adventurous diners with little appetite for starchy rituals and stratospheric prices. They want great food, but they want it to feel more accessible, less effete. They’ll gladly take some style along with it, but not if the tax is too punishing." hmm..Bruni says that there's a generation of diners that like food and are "savvy" but don't like formality and high prices. They like style but not if they have too pay too much for it. Funny, Bruni says nothing about whether he is in that camp. (indeed, age-wise, he's not.) This, btw, is a very accurate description of myself and many of my compatriots. The last paragraph states: "But he does want you to expect and enjoy artistry and professionalism without the formality that often accompanies them. That’s a noble enough goal, accomplished with enough finesse at Momofuku Ssam Bar, to keep the bandwagon clattering along for some time to come." Does anyone object to the idea that "artistry and professionalism without...formality" is a "noble...goal"? Anyone? It's not an exclusive statement. He doesn't say that "artistry and professional with formality is an ignoble goal." wtf? How is any of this a "polemic" against formal dining? I dare you to justify that reading.

eh...most of the 30-year-olds making millions of dollars a year (and I know a few of them) aren't part of the "upper east side crowd"....some of them are even foodies. And, yes, they'll wait an hour. In fact...they'll dine at the bar. Some of them will even take the subway to Queens and back for Thai. (or subway all over Manhattan....if you're really trying to save time you'll beat a cab most of the time). edit: heck, I saw Ethan Hawke waiting in line at Corner Bistro for a seat at the bar just like anyone else the other day...I'd hazard a guess that he makes "millions a year"...(that celebs can get tables anytime at many fine-dining establishments isn't disputable of course)... I used to live in South Florida. I'm quite familiar with Mark Militello...this is the first time I've ever heard his cooking referred to as "haute cuisine" in any form. It's refined comfort food. Massive menus, large portions...fusiony touches...pizzas, pastas. kind of like an upscale cheesecake factory. (his menus are easily available online if someone doesn't believe me)

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 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. ← yup

Bruni's implication could not be further from the truth, as sneak and nathan have already suggested. Hell, last time I was there, it literally was about a 3 1/2 hour meal. And a damn good one, at that. ← Guess you can't believe everything you read in the papers these days. I gave up on the NYT in a lot of areas a long time ago - but if even the food reporting isn't credible - maybe I'll just save 400 bucks a year and use it to buy a swell pair of shoes. Robyn ← Actually, as I noted above, this was Bruni's most accurate review, ever. I didn't see where he implied that this was only a 1-hour meal place.

The food is often great, the comfort level not very good. My point was simply that it wasn't enough for Bruni to state this. He had to make his positive review a polemic against a different type of restaurant he clearly has no use for. He anointed fans of Ssam Bar as torch bearers for a new type of dining. Perhaps they are simply people who really love the food but wish the place was a little more comfortable. Sort of like the way I feel about Prune. ← Considering that Ssam Bar is filled with my demographic...I don't know what you're talking about. It's comfortable enough. If I was paying more, then I would care. You really don't get it. So if this was really your simple point, why did you feel it necessary to denigrate those of us who like the place with several insults on our knowledge and acumen?

This is so completely, ridiculously wrong that I want to laugh out loud. Remember, at one time Peter Luger, with its beer-hall esthetic and gruff service, was a four-star restaurant. That was about 40 years ago. One can give countless examples in the intervening years when non-French, non-Continental restaurants received two stars or more. Those who say that Momofuku Ssam Bar signals a new paradigm are really exaggerating. Again, totally wrong. Claiborne, Sheraton, Reichl --- they were all willing to give two and three stars, and occasionally even four stars, to restaurants that break the classic mold. Frank Bruni is no trend-setter. Here again, a failure to do basic research. To give but one example: between Sheraton, Miller and Reichl, La Grenouille yo-yo'd anywhere from one to four stars. It's not as if Bruni is the first critic to give low ratings to under-performing high-end restaurants.One, and only one thing, is significantly different about Frank Bruni's application of the star system, and Joe Gerard nailed it: ← 1. I said it was my "perception"...not having been around then....my perception appears to have been wrong. 2. Since those reviews aren't available online -- there is no "basic research" that I could do. 3. If the reviews and stars were really that all-over the place...what does that say about the quality of Times critics during the "golden age"? I certainly question them now. 4. What makes Bruni's review of Ssam Bar a "polemic" against formal dining? Specific details please. I didn't read it that way at all.

skip Nougatine. Robuchon Perry Street WD-50 Babbo (alas, no tasting menu for the solo diner) Casa Mono Esca Balthazar Morandi Schiller's Bar Room at the Modern Lupa Otto Gramercy Tavern (front room) Union Square Cafe Yasuda Gotham Bar & Grill Momofoku Ssam Bar you used to be able to get the tasting menu at the bar at EMP...but, alas, no more (catch a theme here? Batali and McNally places are very bar-dining friendly) I have not eaten at Picholine or Cafe Gray...but I've heard great things about solo dining there.

budget? (including wine, tax and tip?)

I actually just had the fried artichokes at Celeste on Friday night. Prefer Williams'....the ones at Celeste were underseasoned (loved the fried parsley that came with them though).

I liked it (a lot)...but I didn't like it anywhere near that much. The food is not substantially dissimilar to what Williams had been doing at Gusto for years...

Bruni implied in his review that it was an "eat and get out" kind of place: "And the backless stools at the counter and tables, the possibility of hour-plus waits, the absence of any coffee or tea and the one throwaway dessert, a mochi ice cream sampler, add up to a few inconveniences more than even many free-spirited diners will want to endure...Mr. Chang doesn’t really want you to linger." Note that I have been in some very high end restaurants like this - e.g., high end sushi restaurants in Japan. They have their place. It's a question of what you're looking for in a restaurant. Robyn ← well, you're certainly not likely to linger over coffee for a half hour at the end of your meal. but frankly, it's hard to explain if you haven't been there.

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). The Times star system in that time was predicated on second category being no-star (or maybe) one-star restaurants...while two, three and four stars were reserved for haute dining. Well, there's a lot more variety now...and a lot more restaurants somewhere else on the continuum. Obviously, some people would prefer to retain the format of the 1950's (thus we have people complaining that Perry Street (which has pretty formal service) doesn't have table cloths, etc. Meanwhile, the Times has recognized that the dining milieu has changed and has adjusted accordingly. The four star level has remained sacrosant...the other stars have been adjusted accordingly. An explicit list of factors has been given: food, service, ambience and price. Each critic weighs those factors differently...but they're all supposed to use them. Bruni has chosen to weigh food and price heavily and the others much less so. Thus, accounting for those factors, there is nothing inherently illogical or dissonant with Ssam Bar and Gordon Ramsay receiving the same rating. If you insist upon the old categories..then I suppose it seems bizarre. But there is no rationale that I can see for the Times to hold onto archaic distinctions.

word. oh wait, you're saying he hasn't even been there? so he was attacking Bruni's review as "laughable" and "indefensible"...calling me stupid, non-savvy and ignorant...when he was talking out of his a____ the entire time?

I can understand just about every conceivable dining preference. But remember, somebody is reserving all of those tables at Per Se. It's almost like Yogi Berra's old comment, "Nobody goes there anymore, it's too crowded." ← I think all this generational stuff may be overblown. If you are a 20 or 30-something person or couple - and you want to have dinner with friends you haven't seen for a while so you can talk and catch up on things - do you want to meet them someplace at 7:30 pm and then wait on line for over a hour so you can be rushed in and out of dinner in less than an hour? I don't think so - but perhaps I am wrong. ← do people wait for an hour (or more)....absolutely. no one gets rushed out of Ssam bar in an hour...not unless you order one dish or something. you could easily have a three hour meal there.

I see. I feel awkward in a French restaurant because I know jacks____t about food and wine. I get it. Or maybe I care more about food then spending an extra $200 for ambience and comfort. I'm into food (and wine), you're into dining. I get it.

Mimi Sheraton ways in: http://www.slate.com/id/2160474/ read the whole thing...lots of insight into the whole critic business.

Its the food that makes it fine dining. edit: regardless of what you call it, the explicit star criteria for the NY Times make no mention of "fine dining" requirements for restaurants at the two, three and four star level. furthermore, you stated: " laughable review of Momofuku Ssam Bar." this implies that you found his praise and assessment of the food to be nonsensical (since 80% of Bruni's review concerned specific dishes). furthermore, you stated: "Just who are these new "savvy" diners? I'm not sure, but one thing is clear, they are not savvy enough to realize they are sitting on chairs without backs." well, as one of those new un-savvy diners too young and stupid to realize that I'm sitting in a chair without a back, I'm also unsavvy enough to think that maybe old fogies shouldn't be dictating what is and is not fine dining (or two star dining) to the rest of us.

I agree with both of your posts. with that said, at least some small part of the popularity of Perry Street and Bar Room at the Modern is that you can walk in off the street without a reservation, sit at the bar and order as little or as much as you want. my avid disagreement with Joe Gerard's post is that there is a new fine dining paradigm which can, in fact, co-exist with the old one. I'm 32 and certainly dine in PS, BRM and SB places far more often...but I also eat at the four-stars (when I can afford to and am in the mood for that kind of experience). there's no reason that these paradigms can't coexist and, in my view, kudos to Bruni for recognizing and validating the new fine dining paradigm (not that it wasn't going to happen whether he validated it or not). (I also don't buy that he is inherently opposed to formal fine dining -- he gave four stars to Per Se and Masa and reaffirmed them for JG. He also gave three stars to Country and the revamped Picholine. What I would say is different about Bruni in that respect is that he certainly doesn't automatically grant stars merely for competent execution of luxe food combined with a formal environment and service.) These are exciting times because for perhaps the first time....you can have access to some of the best food in the city on a moment's notice without having to treat the occasion like an event. What is wrong with that?

in a partially-cash based business...that's very massageable... ← Nobody knows that more than me, but their food and liquor supplies are required to release their records as well. And with the amount of supply-side audits that have been going on lately, I don't think their is going to be as much fudging as usual! ← well, they've asserted that 45-50% of their receipts are from food. if they can prove that ..... one would think it would be a strong argument in their favor (I suspect that many high end restaurants are at less than that due to wine revenues)

in a partially-cash based business...that's very massageable...

(and I'm not saying that Ssam Bar is at Per Se's level -- but it's at a high enough level (as with Bouley Upstairs) that the differences start getting marginal. throw in that you can stop in and have one dish as opposed to an entire tasting menu...I don't know of any other restaurant at that level where you can do that). I do think that it's purely Ssam Bar's informality and lack of ambience which kept it from three stars.

which is exactly why I find egalitarian concepts of "fairness" to be cognitively untenable.

fwiw, I think this was both the most defensible of Bruni's reviews...ever...and his most insightful. Ssam Bar, right now, is one of the top restaurants in NYC. period. (so long as it is actually food that matters to you.) yes, it is conceivably the archetype of a new type of dining...one where what's on the plate is everything. there may be a zillion restauranteurs in NYC that are p___ed right now that Ssam Bar got two stars...but you won't find many chefs that are. (heck, JG just called him one of the three best chefs in the city) it's a new era and a new generation. deal with it. (I really would have been amused at the apopleptic fits if it had gotten three) edit: oh, and I'd be flabbergasted if GR proper were better than Sriphithai (the London Bar isn't even in the same league). (certainly not when price is considered -- which last time I checked was explicitly an official part of the star ratings). edit2: I didn't mean for this to sound harsh. But my generation spends enough on dining and enough of us are savvy on dining that we don't need to have our preferred culinary zeitgeist maligned merely because it doesn't fit into the classic French (or rather the old NY stuffy caricature of French dining) model. Some of the best cooking in the city at a price that I can afford more than a couple times a year....that makes it a great restaurant.

I don't know. how do these hearings work? I don't think either of us knows. maybe the fact that you actually serve relatively sophisticated food and actually have it on premises (unlike a certain bar that got a restaurant liquor license on the basis of a fictional menu that they never actually served) would be good enough. all that I know is that they apparently don't usually even have attorneys at these hearings. edit: after all, it is entitled "Diner's Journal" not "My Night Out on the Town"

I see seven paragraphs discussing the food. but here's the thing...I wouldn't want to read it...I'd just be using its mere existence. I kind of doubt these hearings are that sophisticated. here you've got a list of complaints from neighbors...here you've got the bar, um, restaurant proffering menus. now throw in -- our food was reviewed on ____________ by Frank Bruni, the official restaurant critic for the NY Times!