Steve Klc

Paul--I'd love you to flesh out your point about the truffles deserving their own salesperson and why you are against displaying them in their own locked display case. At first blush, I think you're nuts on this one.

Steve--I thought the best in Cambridge was Toscanini's.

Munchausen's syndrome

Most definitely so, Mark--and speaks to Shaw's sense that the real focus of our Zagat attention should be on the means. And the means in this case are, shall we say, problematic. I'm glad you have pushed this issue forward, Mark.

Mark--we talk about specific restaurants, writers and critics all the time--why aren't you naming names? Who is the editor of the NJ Zagat? Which local newspaper do her reviews appear in? I see you address this in the other thread--and I think it's worth reprinting here: "I know that Andrea Clurfield, reviewer for the Asbury Park Press has had a running feud with Casa Comida for well over 10 years now. I know the owners and have been following this for a long time. The fact that Clurfield is now also the local editor of the NJ Zagat speaks volumes. Casa was listed in all the previous NJ Zagats until Clurfield took the reigns, in fact, in the 99 guide it is quoted as "The best Mexican on the Jersey Shore." The fact that a supposedly "objective" restaurant reviewer can use her position to play politics against establishments that she personally deems "unworthy" is an affront to anyone who thinks the free flow of information is a good thing." Am I to understand that Casa Comida has been left out of the guide completely? Do you know who was the previous local NJ Zagat editor? I always thought a local editor was more of a compiler anyway--but now I'm not so sure. A question--has anyone checked the Zagat website to see if Casa Comida is online?

Mynamejoe--classroom dynamic is a complicated thing to judge. I've taught avocational and professional students at cooking schools. A lot. Thinking as the lead instructor, your time and experience is valuable--and if having one small group of students break down your station after your demo--so you can pay greater attention to what other students are doing--or where you're going next--where's the problem? As long as this small group of students rotates, it's a relatively fair process as well. Thinking as a student--who is paying good money for that instructor's time, expertise and greater awareness of the whole--I don't want my instructor wasting my time by washing his own dishes and breaking down from his demo. He has more important things to do--and has to move the class forward as a whole. There is an hierarchy of effort in the real kitchen and the classroom--and it is hard to comment meaningfully on that when you aren't there. It's not as if all executive chefs and instructors agree how to run things smoothly, how to build their team, etc. That said--schools do deal with this in different ways and I'm interested in following how Malawry thinks her school and instructor have chosen to handle this, and how her opinion may change over time. Some instructors have non-student assistant help, volunteering in return for a tuition break. Some instructors burden their best students with this extra work so they can spend a few extra minutes one-on-one with other students who need the attention. If an instructor personally had to do all his mise en place for every demo and then clean up after himself, then students would be affected as well: A) If instructors spend their time cleaning they will not be able to cover the same amount of material and B) If they have to pay people to do the cleaning students will ultimately pay the price through higher tuition. Focusing in on specifics, like whether the instructor cleans up after his own demo, can distract from the larger, most important issue as far as I'm concerned--how good a communicator is the instructor, how passionate, how attentive and how effective is he as a teacher? You do have to "learn" how to teach in a kitchen classroom--and it is very different from teaching on the job.

I didn't realize this thread was still alive since I first posted, but I just dropped in here and it is hard to figure out who is saying what. But--I'm guessing Leslie said this "One thing I'd add, and I think Steve Klc was getting at this, is that there's a certain intuitive ability to put together flavors, textures, cooking techniques, etc. in order to create something delicious that some home cooks have and some don't and some professionals have, and some don't. It's that that separates the great cooks from the rest." Well, whoever said this--this is precisely how I feel. And as far as the question: "why do you think that a home cook develops said skills while the professional does not?" I can think of four salient factors--working chefs and cooks don't read as much and aren't as educated, don't travel as much, don't eat out at the high end as much and aren't usually encouraged to create or "experiment" on the job but rather do things the same consistent way, the chef's way, time and time again. I realize this is a gross generalization--but working chefs and cooks--work. Hard. They develop deftness, dexterity, stamina and coordination. Many didn't go to college and have never read Harold McGee nor Ed Behr, nor are capable of understanding them even if they should find the time. And depending on where they work--many are aren't exposed to the best in their field often enough. Instead, they know what it takes to do their job--and an awful, mundane, stressful, blue collar job it is at times. Chefs don't have anywhere near as much time to read MFK Fisher or Leslie Brenner or John Whiting or Steve Shaw. They're worried whether their dishwasher is going to show up tomorrow or whether their wife is going to be pissed again that they're getting home late. They're worrying whether they made the right choice to take the job at the country club rather than at the Marriott Hotel. I don't think working cooks and chefs are as likely as passionate amateur cooks to have read books by Keller, Herme, Colicchio, Kunz or Adria,either, to try to understand them. Nuance, perspective, palate and passion don't come from books, school or on-the-job-training--it comes from within and is nurtured--and I don't feel I'm going out on too far a limb here by saying a "home cook" is as likely as not to understand this.

I wonder if Bill Clinton felt the same way about Matt Drudge.

Tommy--good point. I've never read an issue of the GFW newsletter so I have no idea about its fairness, editorial policy or reportage. Its mission statement certainly appears laudible: http://www.gfw.co.uk/index.html For those just catching up, and somehow unaware of either John's proudly-worn bias or clear writing talent, John first went public about eGullet here: http://www.whitings-writings.com/essays/get_a_meal.htm then he introduced us to the GFW newsletter and the sensibility of its new editor here: http://forums.egullet.org/ibf/index.php?s=...7235&hl=ehrlich So, Richard Ehrlich is newsletter editor and perhaps was the one so concerned about events at eGullet or perhaps it was one duly elected "Sarah Jane Evans" as president of GFW. In the course of the above-mentioned thread, John wrote of Ehrlich saying his "op-ed piece was addressed specifically to professional UK food writers. Richard Ehrlich is in fact an American and returns regularly to New York, which is his home.” One of the strengths of eGullet is that all points of view are welcome into the fold--however marginalized and even if those points of view seem at times disingenuous. All should be given their day in the much larger court of public perspective. The larger issue goes beyond John, however; though he is perfectly capable of defending himself and his views, he has every right to withdraw. The real focus should lay bare Ehrlich, Evans and the GFW itself, since as John wrote: "Be they ever so crass, there’s a kind word to be said for editors." John says "I was asked to write the article by one of the directors, who had been following with interest what was happening on the site. He thought that I had accurately caught the essence of it." If you disagree--well, like an old dog you're not going to teach John any new tricks. Turn your attention elsewhere, perhaps where it more rightly belongs. Rather than an isolated rant online on a personal website, as John's first essay was, there was presumably an editor involved with this GFW newsletter "piece." I'm not sure whose judgement should be called more into question.

I'm more than merely "suggesting," my friend. But then so much depends on where in the meal it was tasted and in what pairing context with food.

Was the wine identity disclosed to your dining companions in advance, Shaw? I've enjoyed Argyle and seen it on an increasing number of lists. Also, as you're well aware, wineries have an incentive to get into NY so their wines can be seen on the NY restaurant scene and by NY wine media. Just because a wine may be carried in NY at a given price doesn't mean it is likely to be in NJ, CT, PA, MD, DC or VA at any price. But then, that doesn't fit your definition of the East coast so I hereby withdraw my objection.

Beachfan--I do think availability and exposure plays more of a role than you might think. Bella--we East coasters do travel, you know, and it's incumbent upon anyone hoping to form a sense of what's best or what's interesting to do so and to have an open mind and palate. Navarro has been mentioned, and their beautiful website linked to, numerous times on this site already--I just did a quick search, and found the first time I mentioned them way back in November here: http://forums.egullet.org/ibf/index.php?s=...5503&hl=navarro Here again in the context of direct shipping laws: http://forums.egullet.org/ibf/index.php?s=...5551&hl=navarro also here: http://forums.egullet.org/ibf/index.php?s=...5551&hl=navarro This was also one of our better CA winery threads, to which Beachfan contributed quite a bit: http://forums.egullet.org/ibf/index.php?s=...&hl=schramsberg There's plenty of interest in American wine bella--whenever someone asks me for my favorite two producers I have them taste their way though Navarro first and Chappellet second. (It isn't only their dessert wines--clearly among the best in the world--which win awards; their dry wines garner serious attention, and awards, as well.) However, you can't deny getting your hands on the best US wines, or limited production wines from small wineries, through the vagaries and restrictions of three tier system, all at a fair end price can be problematic. It is another one of the many reasons you are blessed to live where you do--and East coast wine drinkers turn toward France and Spain and Austria and South America and Ontario and Long Island and so on. To your suggestion of Roederer for sparkling wine I'd add my favorite, Schramsberg. It's very good to have you aboard--Margaret Pilgrim needs some local comraderie and we stand to gain from your added perspective as well. Welcome and post a bio in the bio forum if you haven't already done so.

Earl--don't you think it's a bit soon to be asking Malawry "Is it possible to have a career with a late start?" That's something to ask people much farther down the road--after they've acted on their dream, sunk their money into school, worked for a few years and the bloom of hope wears off the rose.

Still Nick, for a fairly well known destination restaurant, as you call it, to receive a "very good" ranking--clearly the reviewer is making a statement. Jhlurie--that's what I see as unfair--I just don't get the sense her written words back up her overall "statement." Granted, it wouldn't be the first time nor the first reviewer found guilty of this. Because the review focused on the hash and not any of the flash--again to use your terms, terms I wouldn't use Nick--I don't see where the content of the review or any of the reviewer's opinions point to any road for improvement or put the reader into any context as to why the "very good" ranking was received. Is she really saying to the Frog & Peach (and to her readers)--I really liked the food but you're not delivering on the total goods given your price point, given what is happening at the other restaurants rated "excellent?" Except for there being only two really good desserts--again, I consider that an achievement for New Jersey--you can't tell. Does F&P have the panache or the refinement or deliver the goods of other restaurants at that price point, other destination restaurants? By avoiding the "flash"--what I view instead as mere essential components of any fine dining review--wine, decor, service sensibility, ambience, professionalism, pacing of the meal--I have no idea what the experience of taking a meal there would be like, nor how it fares in the context of New Jersey fine dining. Nick, you astutely nailed her wasted word count over the chilean sea bass but that's forgiveable, it's been in the news and is trendy. I imagine it would be hard to resist the lure at least once. Viewed as a separate entity, Nick--a fine idea--I still submit this is simply a poor review on its merits, inherently flawed conceptually and structurally, lacking both the nuance and respect a supposed "destination" restaurant should expect from any fine dining reviewer. Perhaps Cook would be better served on the ethnic or cheap eats beat or by reading eGullet a little bit more often.

When I first posted to eGullet about the Elysium back in March--I reported excellent attentive service even on busy nights. Wines, water, bread, dishes explained, dishes carried and presented properly so no fingerprints found their way onto a rim. Servers were superb--mostly young and female--several were there on R&C internship programs from abroad and had experience at other R&C properties. Edward Berriman was there every time I was. That's clearly changed since--and over the course of four visits those familiar faces have left and inexperienced, though eager, servers and runners have replaced them. As Wilfrid noted Edward has help now--a green, but charming and earnest recruit from South Africa. It's probably only natural as not too many restaurants have found economic models to support professional waiters anymore even at the level of the finest dining. Still, the young attractive female servers back in March were way better than any of the very attractive but still young male servers who have supplanted them. I asked Tom Sietsema at the Beard journalism awards dinner if he had been yet and he said no, but that someone else had just reported a great experience there to him as well. Malawry--thanks for the link--his review is eminently fair, well-crafted and does a beautiful job addressing the reservations which potential diners like Colleen might have toward taking a meal there. He clearly "got" the food and the concept--and liked it nearly as much--though perhaps was not as impressed as Wilfrid and I both seem to be, nor did he view the full tasting menu option at $67 as the financial fine dining value we do. My favorite description? "Salads with more of a point of view than most." I do hope it brings more of an audience to Gian Piero. He deserves it. He's the problem though--I wish the review ran a month or two ago. No one is in the city right now and July and August are very down times both for restaurant goers and Post readers. I fear this will fly in under the radar and it shouldn't have--Elysium has been doing good work for some time. The Washingtonian magazine Virginia beat reviewer had already written up this new incarnation of a "Chef of your own" at Elysium in January! Six months is too long to wait. It's not like we have so many interesting new restaurant openings or worthy fine dining experiences that this shouldn't have been a higher priority. It's one of the few new DC delights that we'd be able to point to and say "see, we're not going to stay a second-rate food town for long!" And a word about the desserts. They're not that bad in the larger context of DC dining. Sietsema could write the same cute line about bringing his flight in for a landing before dessert about the disappointing dessert efforts at numerous other higher end places. At least Elysium employs a baker/pastry chef, Annie Meighan, albeit a bit undertrained and inexperienced at an elite NYC or R&C level, a bit distracted by having to produce all the mediocre breads in house and being asked to work too many hours with too little support at this price point. It's really not her fault--she works her butt off and isn't getting the proper support from her chef or the management to compete properly. It's not like Annie is Valerie Hill to Susan Lindeborg. In fact, if she were asked to do inelegant unsophisticated comfort-style Majestic Cafe desserts, she'd be every bit as competent as Valerie. But then, I've said as much to Gian Piero and to the management of Elysium. Now that Sietsema has highlighted it in the Post, I hope they don't make her the scapegoat and instead realize she wasn't part of the problem, the problem was their lack of emphasis on and support for dessert.

Deacon--I think Shaw is being completely serious--if we start summarizing everything we think aspiring writers of local newspaper food sections and freelancers for glossy magazine writers need to know--we'd be doing ourselves--let alone their editors--a huge service! Off the top of my head, someone could: list which 5 adjectives best describe the style or food of the most significant chefs. Start with Emeril, Bobby Flay, Ferran Adria, Heston Blumenthal, Pierre Gagnaire, Pierre Herme; summarize the thread we had not too long ago about words to avoid in a restaurant review and compile a handy list of "go-to" adjectives just in case of a mental block. Start each list with sublime; in fact, why not prepare a standard restaurant review--with fill-in-the-blanks--in just the right places; identify the difference between the restaurants Zagat says are the best versus the restaurants that are really the best in any given city; compose the list of culinary personalities/deities/books that would be sacreligious to ever, ever criticize or question. Start with Julia Child; Top 10 reasons why I became a food writer in the first place; list the most over-hyped, dumbed-down, simplistic books on a subject you actually know something about--say chocolate or desserts--and then list the very few worth reading and cooking from; list the basic words and terms for a cuisine or a subject, and how to pronounce them, so you can at least sound like you know what you're talking about when you order chenin blanc or baklava; list the basic interview questions and predicted answers for a given job or position--chef, sommelier, baker, winemaker; Example--so chef, what's the most important aspect of your cooking philosophy? Answer--the best locally-sourced organic ingredients possible. list the differences between potentially confusing terms like winemaker and vintner; list all essential acronyms--like EVOO; Some one else?

Our first publication: "eGullet Prime--so you want to be a food writer?"

Cab--you do realize how unintentionally funny your "qualifications" list is? I'd fail 1, 2, 4, part of 6 and 7. I'd fail number 1 because no one in DC cares about Baltimore, and if anyone does, they shouldn't. That would be like New Yorkers caring what's going on in Boston or Hartford. I couldn't confidently tell you the name of a single good restaurant in Baltimore. Here would be my list for the same staff writer at the Post food section: A talented writer with an open mind who enjoys cooking and dining out at least occasionally.

Here's another review of Elysium which appeared in the Washington Flyer magazine: http://www.fly2dc.com/articles/2002/2002_03_dn1.asp The reviewer, Ben Giliberti, is a very, very knowledgeable wine guy who every other week writes a spot-on wine column in the Washington Post Food section. He added this restaurant gig last year and seems--how shall I put this--less than helpful critically. He's not quite a shill, but to take just one example--he seems to think desserts are a specialty or special treat everywhere! His typical dessert approach? Delectable, outrageously good , gorgeous miniatures, impossible to pick a favorite, not to be missed, truly inspired have all been used recently. Who knew there were so many really good pastry chefs in this town? I certainly didn't. And if Ben somehow fails to mention desserts in a review--they must really, really suck rather than just typically underwhelm. They must truly suck in a "Red Lobster, White Trash and the Blue Lagoon" Joe Queenan way of sucking.

This is an interesting thread. The first time I read it, my initial thought was, Cab, you gotta be kidding. What an annoying post. The overwhelming thrust of the article was local: about the Inn at Little Washington chef and his preparation and the mention of these other chefs and their pairings was isolated and perfunctory--when viewed in the context of the article. The entirety of the article was fantastic--a piece stunning for its depth and breadth and very rare for the Post--an article which focused on a chef. (A chef I think is over-hyped and underwhelming but that's not the issue.) Still, a mistake is a mistake, Cabrales caught it and I switched over, thinking this thread dead. But now, I revisit and it seems another way to look at this is whether the "mistake" had been made by the R&C, the organizers of the event themselves, and that the Post was merely guilty of relying on press materials or information taken of the organization's own website for their details. It wouldn't be the first time a release was sent out or posted online with errant facts or a transposition--and/or that chefs or details were changed in a subsequent press release at the last minute. Deadlines have to be met and perhaps the official information provided by R&C changed as the invited chefs themselves started re-arranging who wanted to cook where, who could get a flight where, etc. So, to me, the salient issue had seemed that the particular pairings of chefs and the restaurants was a very minor, value-added, even "filler" mention to the much larger feature--the feature story on Patrick O'Connell which involved the real reporting and sourcing--which seemed spot on. Still, the brief, value-added mention did contain at least one error which Cabrales caught--so while it seems very possible to me that this error was promulgated by the event organizers themselves--the question then becomes--is it reasonable to expect that the writer or copy editor from the Washington Post food section should have caught this as if a matter of common professional culinary media knowledge--like whether the French Laundry is in Napa or St. Helena or Calistoga--or made a phone call on deadline to doublecheck the information, which as I suspect was provided to them by the event organizers. To both questions I answer no. No local readers were going to go to the event as a result of the article and potentially rely on any specific information provided by the article. Now, if Food Arts ran with the pr materials and no one caught the mistake--no bell rang in anyone's head to say hey, that's not right--that would be a wholly different story. I think I'm now leaning on the side of the Post in this. The Post serves its local readers--and isn't endowed with the reach or depth or mantle of the NY Times Food section as Jeanne herself readily admits. I believe Jeanne chuckled and said no one from the Post could actually afford to go to the event and I suspect very few of the staff writers ever eat at Michelin two and three star restaurants. I suspect the Washington Post restaurant critic doesn't eat often enough at any of the best French restaurants to have that level of familiarity with what's going on over there. So Cab, now that I've revisited this, I find I'm swinging like an open gate, back toward the Post and am cutting them some slack.

yes, Tommy, these polls are very entertaining, but in the same way people try to predict who'll win the Academy awards, these polls are a good way to take the pulse of: 1) whether the readership considers the same restaurants to be the best as do the local food media and restaurant critics a la Rosie, Ms. Cook, Mr. Corcoran, the Bergen Record, etc.--which hints at the possible reach and influence of the critics; 2) whether the chefs and food pros within the industry agree, and consider the same restaurants as the readership does to be the best or most favorite --and if not, why not? Then 3) there's another angle that some might find interesting--and that is the role pandering and advertising possibly plays in these glossy city or regional monthly magazines--and whether this form of restaurant coverage and review is inherently more conflicted and less reliable than that area's newspaper critics. There's a higher standard emerging in this arena--Washingtonian magazine has been doing a fantastic job with restaurant, food and wine coverage, look at what Corby Kummer is doing at Boston Magazine and my personal favorite, Patrick Kuh at LA Magazine.

Rosie--were NJ Monthly readers polled on their favorite New York restaurants as well? In fact, was the wording of the poll to vote for their "favorite" or the "best" in each category--or was the distinction not made? Congratulations Lou and also to David at Nicholas and the Frog and Peach folks. That's darn impressive to be mentioned in the same breath as that Ryland Inn--and interesting since the Frog only got a "Very good" ranking from the NYTimes.

Off the cuff Cab, I suspect if we hashed out the merits of each, NYC would lag behind but I'm not confident enough to predict without engaging others and going through the process first. I will of course decline and deflect politely as Shaw and Bux and Plotnicki and countless others have for the moment re: the particular 8. And here I was worrying the lawyers and political scientists of the bunch were going to jump down my throat as a liberal arts major with the temerity to even attempt to interpret the jurisprudence of Mssr. Shaw! Thank you Cab for letting me off that hook--on which you most certainly could skewer me--but I think your larger point is a valid thread worth pursuing on its own merits--narrowly defined as a comparison of the most elite expressions, the most total experiences, the very "best" of NYC versus the very best of Paris or all of France. No Adria, no London wannabees, no French Laundry--even though many would certainly include those on any best of the world list. Just New York and Paris (or all of France) and only at the higher end. Several people here have been hinting at and dodging around this since the "NYC 8 best" popped up yesterday. And let's try to put ourselves in the mindset that Shaw and Lizziee and Plotnicki have advocated--though there is not complete agreement with the feasibility or reward of this approach. I'm game--though we'd have to try to define the parameters in the ways Shaw and Plotnicki have started to in posts from yesterday or we'll be lost before we begin.

Nick--her writing ability and the issue of whether this group of seven outing was her only meal at the restaurant aside--she stated there was another visit after the first visit--I read the review and I think I'd have to get more of a feel of the other restaurants Cook and Corcoran have rated "Very Good, Excellent, or Extraordinary" and their price points in order to assess it and in order to address David's post. Seemed like a typical Grimes "one star but should have been a two star" review--but what we're supposed to infer from the lack of stars and the verbal ranking of "very good" I am not sure. The review was all about the food--which she seemed to like quite a bit--but nary a hint about the restaurant experience, nothing about the pacing of the meal, the attentiveness of the service, professionalism of the host or sommelier, the ambience, decor, cool bathrooms if those are your thing, lighting, intimacy, etc. In all, a very weak assessment of the "total" experience and there is nothing in this review to inspire me to trust her perfunctory wine list assessment as "extensive and expensive." If I were the chef--I wouldn't be upset because this clip will help him get a better job or a raise; if I were the restaurant owner--I'd likely be a little more upset that so much was not mentioned or not appreciated--assuming those bases were covered. They may also be trying to do without a real pastry chef--and if so, they only have themselves to blame. In short, I wonder if her other reviews also lack nuances of the overall experience, and merely feature how individual dishes were composed or how they worked on her palate. I like more nuance than "clean tablecloths." Even in the dessert category--Cook felt two desserts were pretty darn good--but was this enough to demote the ranking to "very good?" Someone would have to convince me there are better desserts in NJ at the high end than I think there are for this to be such a damning indictment. I have a feeling David Santos may turn out to be more accurate in his opinion of the place than Ms. Cook's "very good" ranking. Since my parents live in Middlesex county, I just may check this place out soon. After we check out restaurant Nicholas of course. But Grimes has made a two star ranking much tougher for restaurants to achieve. Remember Ilo was one of the few three stars awarded last year. David--do you really feel this restaurant merits three stars on the Grimes NY restaurant scale? Do you feel Grimes would have even given it two stars--your personal feelings for your friends who work there aside? Or do you feel it merits an "excellent" on the "ambiguous not quite the same thing as a star ranking" for NJ?

Someone just ask Corcoran--surely he's aware of the answer as to whether his reviews have been online on the Times site. If the reviews were online--surely some restaurant would have linked to a review and someone in New Jersey would have been aware of this. Besides Khao, and besides now. (I know, surely, surely.)