Nathan

I agree with both of you.

in an abstract sense, yes. but in reality, neither the dining public nor restauranteurs are benefited by waiting a year. Wylie had significant money behind him (and PR)...he didn't need reviews early on. most restaurants do. most theatrical productions get sharper as time goes on (about the tenth performance is perfect). but they need reviews right away to survive. most restaurants aren't much different.

agreed. but three months isn't premature.

the southern style curry had no heat whatsoever (a clear victim of CSS)! our spice tolerances are just different.

come on! restauranteurs would be appalled at what you suggest, Ned! many places don't make it a year let alone three years! they need reviews to survive. and, for the reasons I pointed out, the distinction between theater and dining reviews is absolutely fallacious. what you're really asking for is completely doing away with the review system. as I've said before, the Times critics clearly see themselves as writing for the benefit of the public, not for the benefit of restauranteurs.

I think the tasting menu had six savory courses, a cheese plate and three desserts. So it looked like it would be a "proper meal"... as for the room...I wouldn't order it sitting at the bar (those stools were becoming uncomfortable quickly...but the banquettes and seats looked comfortable enough...the room might become distracting if I was eating alone but with sufficiently pleasant company.....

I stopped in here last night around 11. Its small, I counted somewhere between 23 and 26 seats. Decor is reminiscent of the Jetsons with an admixture of Shag (the gay/hetero-date bar on Hudson and Abington nearby) thrown in. The wine list has close to a 100 selections, about 15 by the glass. This is not a cocktail destination. Ingredients were free-poured, perfunctorily shaken (for a one-count) and the ideas generally don't work. A "violet negroni" was basically a negroni with blood orange juice (an old and decent summer chiller) but almost sans gin and with campari added in some sort of reduced fashion with a spritzer. Nifty gimmick but its not enough campari (or gin for that matter) to make a balanced drink. All I really tasted was orange.... A "Rose" cocktail was merely prosecco with some candied rose bits floating in it (there were ostensibly other ingredients -- elderflower, but they couldn't be detected). Other concoctions looked sickeningly sweet and the same amateurish crap as at every other new restaurant. I have to give them props for having some house-made sodas as well. I've only seen JG do this before (both at JG proper and at Perry Street). I wasn't hungry but perused the menu anyway. The current "preview" menu is not identical to the one posted on the New York Magazine website. Anyway...it has about 8 savory items, about 5 "savory and sweet" items and about 10 sweet desserts. In addition there are cheese plates and a 10 course tasting menu for $59 that looked quite interesting. We ordered a dish from the "savory and sweet" section -- Meyer Lemon ice with smoked salt and pepper and cheese. This was very tasty. The lemon, salt and pepper balanced each other nicely, the cheese had been somehow whipped into a creamy consistency and lay under the ice. The presentation was clever -- wooden spoons and a glass bowl...elegantly simple and a contrast to the general decor. It worked. Service was good and pleasant.

top 3 in NY (I haven't been to Per Se or Masa): Jean Georges Momofuku Ssam (I'm being both perverse and serious) WD-50 with shoutouts to Yasuda, Robuchon, Esca and Daniel. best restaurant in America: Alinea

the pork leg with mustard greens is awesome and packs no heat at all. the beef offal soup is mildly spiced and really good. I think the bean thread salads usually don't have much if any...

one major word of warning (and this could well pose a problem with your group...assuming you're all Caucasian looking): Sri, like many other restaurants, suffers from Caucasian Spice Syndrome (CSS)....if even one member of your group utters a word of hesitancy about spice..(i.e. something along the lines of "we like some spice...but not too spicy")....they'll give you barely any heat at all. the only solution is to ask your spice-phobic members ahead of time to keep their mouths shut and promise to order them items that intrinsically have no heat. otherwise, they'll ruin it for the rest of you if they say a word. I've yet to have had serious heat at any meal at Sri due to CSS.

both. the straw-wrapping is known as a "fiasco". it was used to protect the thin glass. this hand-wrapping became cost-prohibitive in the 20th century...they just switched to better bottles. more expensive wines are cellared on their sides anyway and thus don't need it. so...today it's a historical affectation.

That is my point. In recent years these festivals in Manhattan and the Bronx were attended by locals as well as tourists (who were there because of the locals). Manhattan's Little Italy has been dying slowly over the years as there were fewer and fewer locals who were Italian and more and more tourists. In the end when the tourists realize there are few locals who are italian it will be over. ← agreed

No neighborhood is ever going to be what it was in the distant past. The most one can envision is that the neighborhood becomes relevant again, though not in the way it formerly was. ← You are correct. I wasn't trying to be overly nostalgic, just noting that what was will no longer be - for better or worse. As for the talk about Spring Street and Houston and that general area - that has never been Little Italy - at least not in my lifetime so far as I know. That was always SoHo and so far as I can tell still is. The construct of "NoLita" is relatively recent. If I recall correctly the area of SoHo began gentrifying in the 1960's. Prior to that it was pretty industrial. The Italian immigrants and their accompanying cultural institutions including markets and restaurants skirted the area of Soho with residential enclaves in Little Italy and Greenwich Village. ← according to wikipedia, Little Italy extended from Lafayette to Bowery and up to Bleecker. which makes sense, since Elizabeth Street was part of Little Italy into at least the late 20th century (if I recall correctly, Robert DeNiro grew up on Elizabeth). heck, my old apartment building on Spring and Elizabeth still had a couple Italian-American senior citizens left...who had lived in the neighborhood all their lives. http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Little_Italy,_Manhattan http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoLIta%2C_Manhattan edit: I can't confirm that about DeNiro, but Scorcese grew up on Elizabeth and it was considered part of Little Italy: http://64.233.167.104/search?q=cache:l33jz...lnk&cd=16&gl=us

Fr.Og. too. I haven't bothered to check the addresses of all the others. I have, and it's no such thing. A formerly very gritty area, with some up-and-coming storefronts alternating with a number of still-dilapidated ones. Within, say, a 2-block radius of Public, just count the number of storefronts, the condition they're in, whether they're open in the evening, etc., etc. Hip, of course, depends on who's doing the counting. Some people think West Chelsea is hippest. Others think it's Williamsburg. The Lower East Side can probably make a case. It's hard to think of a more overworked and less meaningful word.But in any event, whatever the merit of those streets and their current tenants, the one indisputable point is that it's not especially Italian any more. The article's 1 and only point, is that someone is trying to make the area not just relevant, but also Italian again. Whether they succeed or not is, of course, speculative. About 90% of such ideas are never implemented. But it is at least notable that a few people who are Italian, and have deep roots in the area, and still live there, are trying to do something about it. ← nope. despite what Eater says, Fr.Og is not on the same block as Balthazar. as for the others...I only lived in the neighborhood for three years...I've seen almost everyone of those first appear...and the rents in the hood become some of the highest in NY (fact). yes, the storefronts are gritty. that's the point! but ask any monied under-40 downtown NY'er if NoLIta is "hip"...especially women. edit: as to the larger point, Italian boutiques will only move in to the extent that NoLIta becomes fashion mainstreamed...which is happening unfortunately (see the Ralph Lauren store). modern Italians really don't feel much connection with Italian-Americans and I don't see them picking an area just for sympatico reasons. they're not going to deal with Mulberry and the San Gennaro festival..etc. sure, Prada, Fendi, Dolce & Gabbana etc. may well move east over time....but that'll just be part of the mainstreaming of NoLIta. my real problem though, is with YOUR statement here: "One could envision a scenario (still a long way off) that the luxury stores lure more sophisticated visitors into the neighborhood, and the fine restaurants follow. But for now, it's just a glimmer in someone's eye." with all due respect, you have no clue what you're talking about. Peasant, The Tasting Room, Bar Marche, Barossa, Public, Cafe Colonial and Xicala are on Elizabeth. Cafe Falai is on Lafayette. Bread is on Spring between Elizabeth and Mott. Epistrophy is on Mott. (there's nothing Italian about any of these of course...and certainly not Peasant.) there are quite a few restaurants on Prince.....one of the most well-known sake bars in the city, etc. etc.. edit2: I agree that unfortunately, no four-star restaurants are going to open in NoLIta anytime soon...but this has nothing to do with "sophistication"....heck the Koolhas Prada store didn't bring four star restaurants to SoHo either. it's not going to happen because the semi-geriatric crowd needed to keep those restaurants profitable aren't going to deal with the "grittiness"

Whatever the point may be, it was the article's, not mine.But you are over-romanticizing those streets and misconstruing the patch of real estate that the article is referring to. Balthazar, for instance, is at the corner of Spring & Crosby, which is considered SoHo by any definition I've ever encountered. ← then the article was written by someone who's never been downtown. Balthazar was the one iffy mention because it depends upon whether you define the western boundary of NoLIta as Lafayette or Broadway. as for "over-romanticizing those streets", take a stroll down Elizabeth between Houston and Spring sometime. it's only the hippest shopping street in NY. or try reading a European Vogue when they talk about shopping in the U.S......or Wallpaper...or an American Vogue or GQ or Esquire for that matter. edit: for example, the two most talked-about men's stores in NY are both on Elizabeth -- Seize Sur Vingt and Barker Black. Duncan Quinn and Lord Willy's are less than a block away. for kids -- Trust Fund Baby, etc. for women -- Mayle, Henry Lehr, Tory Burch, Tracy Feith, Sigerson Morrison and many, many, many more.

There are, of course, no fine restaurants in the neighborhood. Peasant, The Tasting Room, Cafe Falai, Bread (now greatly expanded), Epistrophy, Xicala, Balthazar, Fr.Og, Public, Eight Mile Creek, Barossa, NoLIta House, 24 Prince, and a bunch of others are all fast food joints. In addition, NoLIta is not filled with luxury boutiques and has not become one of the most famous high-end shopping areas in the world (literally) over the past five years. If your point is that none of these places is on Mulberry Street, that's true...but historically speaking, Little Italy encompassed Elizabeth, Mott and Prince....arguably the most saturated restaurant and boutique streets in New York today.

huh? we weren't talking about Arthur Avenue. there are no Italians left in Little Italy/NoLIta/Chinatown...except for a few senior citizens. the largest blocs of residents today in NoLIta are Europeans and Australians....and none of them are over 40. people who live there flee the festival. what are you talking about? edit: there's a reason why the neighborhood has asked for the festival license to be revoked. no one local wants it there (and it's really bad for the local businesses).

If the discussion on this topic is any indication as to how low the area has fallen as regards Italian food, I daresay that it was that much better in the 80's. ← I have a hard time believing it was as bad then as it is now.

the Modern began serving lunch on November 20, 2004. The Bar Room began serving dinner on January 5, 2005. since Bruni's first review included dishes in the Bar Room...I think the November 20, 2004 date counts. edit: to be precise, the Bar Room at the Modern began serving lunch on November 20, 2004.

Brilliant. Can you explain in what sense it's "fair" for one to be reviewed on its opening night, and not the other? It's appropriate to review different things in different ways. Plays, for example, are usually extensively workshopped and previewed. So, by the time they open, they should be largely worked out. It is, of course, possible to rehearse and refine a piece of staged theater without the need of having customers (aka, an audience). Therefore, it's more appropriate to review the opening night performance of a play. In practice, whether a play's opening night is the reviewed performance will depend on the length of the run. If it's a scheduled run of 40 performances of Macbeth with Liev Schreiber at Shakespeare in the Park, the reviewers may choose to wait a while and may not review the opening performance. If, on the other hand, it's a scheduled run of 6 performances of Verdi's Macbeth at the Met, the opening performance will be reviewed. If the opening performance weren't reviewed, the run might be almost over by the time the review found its way into print. Restaurants, on the other hand, aren't set up to have a limited run. They also don't have the luxury of 3 months of workshopping, previews and a "pre-run" in Toronto. They also are not working within a known, extensively interpreted repertoire and tradition like opera performers. They also work in a milieu in which having an audience changes everything, and they have a limited opportunity to work with a "practice audience" (3 days of F&F doesn't cut it). This makes it more appropriate, IMO, to wait a while before reviewing a restaurant. Give them a chance to rehearse. Reviewing a restaurant on opening night (or very early on) is like going to see a performance of a newly-composed opera that's only had one rehearsal. The perormers are going to settle in and get better, the composer might make some changes (Madama Butterfly was extensively revised three times after its premiere), and so on. So, to review the opera, the performers, etc. on the second rehearsal isn't meaninfgul. One could say the same thing about reviewing a restaurant in the first month. ← In addition, comedic productions require a live audience before they can be polished. You simply don't know what all the laugh lines are until a live audience is reacted. This is immensely important in terms of pacing and ensuring that you don't talk through an audience response.

Brilliant. Can you explain in what sense it's "fair" for one to be reviewed on its opening night, and not the other? It's appropriate to review different things in different ways. Plays, for example, are usually extensively workshopped and previewed. So, by the time they open, they should be largely worked out. [text removed] Restaurants, on the other hand, aren't set up to have a limited run. They also don't have the luxury of 3 months of workshopping, previews and a "pre-run" in Toronto. They also are not working within a known, extensively interpreted repertoire and tradition like opera performers. They also work in a milieu in which having an audience changes everything, and they have a limited opportunity to work with a "practice audience" (3 days of F&F doesn't cut it). ← I can assure you that the vast majority of professional theatrical productions are not extensively workshopped and previewed. 3 days of F&F is more like it. The big money/writer/actor productions that do have extensive previews and rehearsal are equivalent to a major new restaurant by say Thomas Keller or Jean Georges...who can certainly afford months of previews and rehearsal. (I'm certainly not claiming that restaurants should be reviewed on opening night....but a couple months should be enough. Of course, in this respect perception is everything. Someone once asserted here that Bruni reviewed The Modern within two months of its opening...he actually waited almost six.)

a cynic might suggest that a good way to get comps from restaurants and to develop a symbiotic, career-furthering relationship with them would be to write almost entirely positive "reviews" at the beginning of one's blogging career.

ha! I was actually on my way to meet a date at Epistrophy...but was just appalled to see a velvet rope and red carpet next to Sur La Table...it's just not that kind of street.

a major beef that I have with writers who accept comps, invitations and freebies...is that it raises a significant question not just about the veracity of their positive reviews, it raises an even larger one about their (infrequent) negative reviews. are they really just panning a place because they were treated like ordinary diners?

You're right. No one's livelihood is at stake in theater. All Broadway, off-Broadway, and off-off Broadway actors, dancers and singers are extremely well-compensated with excellent job security. As well, there are no financial backers for theater productions, putting up millions of dollars with any real risk that they'll lose it all. Furthermore, no theater productions ever close after a week of performances, or even a month. In addition, there are, of course, far more paid (or unpaid for that matter) acting jobs then there are actors. And anyone can get an Equity card. (yeah, this is a little personal)