Nathan

I think you certainly can! it's sort of a college-freshman relativism to say that objective statements about aesthetics aren't possible...

right. I found that kind of a disjunction. I like this food when I'm in the mood for it. but I don't like it enough to pay a lot for it. on the other hand, it's kind of a shame that you have to go to midtown for it. I'd speculate that a fashion-forward, hip restaurant serving French classics could actually do very well downtown....it'd be sort of a mixed-genre, pseudo-ironic kind of thing...but that's the kind of restaurant I'd like to eat at.

or put differently, like most thing, it's a mixed bag. Per Se is objectively more comfortable than Ko (whether it's warmer is a separate matter). it's objectively more in the traditional mode of fine dining service. whether Per Se performs well in that traditional mode is a matter best measured by a large aggregate number of experiences. same thing for kitchen consistency. whether you prefer the style of service at Per Se, or whether you prefer the style of food, are both subjective matters.

well, I sure hope Benoit isn't as boring as Adour (food wise). French comfort food has never gone away....and it was primed for a comeback...the Italian trend is pretty well played out. what's gone are the old guard places...heck, even Le Cirque has made its concessions to contemporary tastes.

but someone can say that Monet is objectively better than the stick figures I draw. just because something is partially subjective doesn't make it entirely so. Per Se is objectively better than Chuck E. Cheese. Period. in four years we'll have the data necessary to compare Per Se and Ko. maybe the differences will be close enough to make it entirely subjective (Rousseau v. Toulouse-Latrec), maybe they will be broad enough to render a somewhat objective judgment. aesthetics (of which food is a part) are not immune to objective judgments, it's just that there's plenty of inherent subjectivity.

ah...my old hood. easy: Balthazar, Bread, Ruby's (great burger), Gitane (food's mediocre but the atmosphere is fun), Despana, Bahn Mi No.1....or loads of Chinatown possibilities.

This raises an interesting question, best discussed on the reviewing topic not here. The question is: what's a review? If a mediocre writer like Platt writes a first-impressions piece about Ko, does it magically become a review by virtue of being in New York Magazine (or on its website)? What about Ruth Reichl's piece on the Gourmet blog? What about all the detailed, heavily photographed reports on various websites (this one included)? What makes something a review or not a review? ← Platt gave it stars and it will show up in the NY Mag review archive.

He normally does that anyway (unless you consider RestaurantGirl "major"). ← RG wrote up Momofuku Ko? I can't find it. Who'd she fellate to get the res? ← no, it's just that usually she's first. Sutton and Platt have been the only Ko reviews so far.

That's pretty remarkable. Did you have any say in that before the meal started? I'll be pretty chapped next week if I don't get the foie dish I had on my first visit but it's being offered to first timers. ← I got the foie dish. but, no, the dishes come as they come. a little bit to the consternation of the young lady seated next to me when I received the pea soup while she had the kimchi consomme... I'm going back soon so we'll see what happens then.

actually, the menu seems to change somewhat automatically for second-time visitors. I was getting different courses than the people next to me.

new dishes appear at Ko with regularity. a proper review needed more than a one-visit sampling.

meatpacking is only trendy with tourists/B&T. although Merkato 55 is actually good (how long will that last?) there's really nothing specific on union square but just north of it in Gramercy you could go to Casa Mono or Gramercy Tavern or up to Murray Hill for Bar Milano (which opens this week but will be guaranteed to be hot for a few months before people notice that it's in Murray Hill). in the WV: Bar Blanc, Commerce, Waverly Inn or Smith's are plenty hot. in the middle village: Elatteria might work. in the EV: Ssam Bar (which doesn't take reservations) or Gemma.

apparently well-regarded Peruvian restaurants specific to Queens include: La Pollada de Laura El Sol Inti Raymi

of course, the Pio Pio chain has at least two Manhattan branches, so I don't see any reason offhand to pick one in Queens.

well, automats can be found in both the U.S. and Japan. McDonalds has experimented with self-ordering. at the hottest restaurant in NY, Momofuku Ko, you are essentially served by the chefs (as with sushi bars)... he seems to have combined these concepts... edit: I think I ran across an automat in Sweden some years ago too.

if you have a few extra minutes...you're better off walking up a couple blocks to Bedford....I think Moustache serves lunch. Ditch Plains does. etc.

Depending on the publication, fact checking can be far more thorough than that -- and often is. Having written for the New York Times on a few occasions, I can tell you that every factual claim I've made has had to be substantiated by references provided to my editor. Definitions of culinary terms are exactly the sort of thing the New York Times fact checks rigorously, so my guess is that this one just slipped through the cracks -- perhaps because the story didn't get edited by the dining-section team (it seems to have come from the Rome bureau as a news story). ← correct. but they don't normally check your references. unless it's a very high-profile story. the basic problem is logistical. way too much content in the Times every day...you'd have to have hundreds of people doing the checking.

I had an absolutely fabulous meal here on Saturday night. walked in about 10, place was mostly full but they had a table available (bar was full). new spring menu. seafood heavy. excellent kanpachi app to start. kind of Hearth like...but if anything, the execution was even better. marvelous use of spring vegetables. but, unusually for New York, the entree was the star of the night. perfectly cooked, moist veal...with sensational sweetbreads, spring peas and mushrooms. just great. brie/potato side was darn tasty too. cocktail list sucks....straight from the 90's...or Miami. service was good. I don't know why NY foodies are down on this place. Is the decor too South Beach? the lighting too bright? the people too trendy and un-foody? it can't be the food...it's every bit as good as any three star I can think of.

oy, that's simply awful.

well, the only three star Michelin restaurant in Rome has a German chef cooking Italian food... the definition of guanciale isn't something that would be likely to be fact-checked (journalistic "fact-checking" primarily involves names, spellings and dates....unless questions are raised after the fact).

the wine list has been fleshed out. two different wine pairings are now offered. interesting selection of microbrews as well. pea soup with a grilled langoustine is absolutely fantastic. usually I find vegetable soups tend to have a lot of flavor from a stock...this was all pea. reminded me a bit of that pea flan from the old version of 11 Madison. cereal milk panna cotta with guacamole and chocolate was also very nice. this isn't Ssam Bar or Noodle Bar, the cooking is quite a bit more refined. if anything it's an attempt to take haute technique and use different ingredients. witness the kimchi consomme (which I didn't have this time)...at ssam bar you'd expect a heavy kimchi kick from a dish like that...not here. it's a legitimate, elegant consomme. but it's really good.

I ate (and drank) at the bar at Adour last night. the four seats were taken when I arrived at 6:50...were emptied by 7:10 and only one seat was taken when I left at 8. the dining room was mostly full when I left, but not completely so. (interesting sidenote, there is a large table in the dining room with the same projection technology as the bar.) the interactive projection tech on the bar is fun...albeit with a small learning curve. then it works (kind of). for a supposedly wine-centric establishment, the list could be broader. glasses ranged from $9 to $45 or so. median probably around $20. staff seemed very familiar with the wines (and there are a lot of staff). food: had the scallops, the jamon iberico and the lamb lollipops. the lamb itself was flavorful, albeit one piece was chewier, but the diced vegetables on top had no taste at all. but the lamb itself was good. the scallops, like the lamb, were perfectly cooked (there is no questioning the technical execution of the kitchen), with a couple flecks of truffle and probably some truffle oil. no real flavors present besides the natural sweetness of the (good) scallops. this dish really could use some contrast. the printed menu says its jamon iberico. the interactive menus just says its jamon. it didn't have the nuttiness of the jamon iberico I had while traveling last year...but maybe that's just because it was sliced so thin? the accompaniments to the jamon are very good. service was extremely good and pleasant. my wines were topped off more than once.

this is one place where I'll actually get dessert. well-made..not very sweet.

actually, that menu's out of date. I'd consider a tasting of crudi, definitely a primi and then a secondi for two.

or Susur. realistically, "Fall 2008" means "2009"