docsconz

If one encounters a "great" dish and upon research and some digging one does not find great ingredients then one would be wrong that it is a great dish. Reverse logic. It would merely be a dish that one individual enjoyed. the way to approach it is if there are great ingredients then the possibility of having a great dish exists. Nothing more. ← I was simply following the logic that you applied upthread when you said that it was not possible to have a great dish with inferior ingredients. You are certainly correct that great ingredients do not guarantee a great dish. That also requires great technique and great conception. The bottom line is that a great dish is a great dish even if it could possibly be improved with better ingredients. What is the ultimate goal if not the enjoyment of the diner?

Excellent review that certainly whets my appetite to dine at Ledoyen. What I don't see is the need to make everything so either/or or black/white. Both extremes of cooking and the in-between have their positive elements. I am not here to criticize the traditional cooking "ingredient driven" restaurants, which I also appreciate very much. I do have a hard time with absolutism though. For whatever reason many traditionalists such as Santi Santamaria and others who have posted here attack Ferran Adria and his cooking. He on the other hand remains duly respectful of tradition even as he creates new traditions. At the end of the day it is all still food to be enjoyed and there are many ways to enjoy it.

These two become mutually exclusive when ingredients have been manipulated too much and /or their qualities have been masked. ← Given that as per Milla above that it requires great ingredients to make a great dish (i.e. a great dish cannot be made without great ingredients) then if one encounters a great dish it must have been made with great ingredients. If one then assumes that there are great dishes within the realm of avant-garde cooking then it follows that great ingredients must have been used for those dishes. It is debatable and a matter of subjective opinion as to whether great dishes have arisen from the realm of avant-garde cooking. It is my subjective opinion that they have and that indeed they have at elBulli. The espardenyes, the snails, the crab and the olive spherifications were examples of some great dishes that I had that I felt incorporated the greatness of their primary ingredients and indeed the supporting ingredients. In other cases at elBulli and elsewhere, the great ingredients may have been used otherwise than to focus on their essential nature, but that doesn't mean that the essential nature of those ingredients did not contribute significantly to the final dish. It is this latter point where we have a fundamental disagreement. we both agree on the ingredient-driven element of a restaurant such as Rafa's, but we disagree that a highly manipulated cuisine can still be ingredient driven. Depending upon the effects that a chef wishes to achieve a particular ingredient may be superior to another. For example there is one particular pasta dish that is simply better (to me) with canned peas even though I prefer ultra-fresh for practically any other use. Of course some canned peas are better than others.

Vedat, I agree that the disagreement is narrowing down. we may have to agree to disagree regarding El Bulli and Ferran Adria's talents and skills, although I have no basis to assess his abilities to cook traditional catalan cuisine. I also have no basis to doubt those abilities, however, but then this is straying from the point at hand... While Arzak may be less vanguard today then it has been, it was still one of the major innovators in Spain. I ate there in 2004 and had a fabulous meal. Perhaps it has deteriorated since then. I cannot say, though I know that both you and Mikael, two knowledgeable and respected palates, have criticized it before now. Clearly not all chefs, whatever their stripes, are ingredient conscious. i am happy to see you acknowledge that there are at least some avant-garde chefs who you feel are. My whole point is that the concept of being ingredient driven and avant-garde (or whatever term one wishes to use) are not mutually exclusive One additional point that I would like to address regards Adria and importation of ingredients. While he is not averse to importing ingredients for a specific purpose, I do not believe that is his primary avenue for sourcing ingredients nor his preference. If he can get an ingredient of quality from somewhere that is either unavailable locally or of inferior quality, he is unafraid to do so. However, if he can source products locally he does. There is certainly no lack of quality product in Catalunya, but then he does utilize global elements in his cooking that are not available locally.

And it has been my experience without exception both in the kitchen and as a diner. Without exception. That's good. It is a law of physics. You might cover something up with a heavy sauce but you can't change or make something a better quality through your skills as a chef. you can't make a carrot younger or make a industrial farmed carrot taste vaguely artisanal without some sort of fakery. Stating the obvious now and my original point (and perhaps vmilor's as well) earlier in the thread. This point should be clarified, however, by saying that when you state inferior, that means not the best that one can possibly procur. It can be more clearly stated by saying "satisfactory results are likely to be attained with satisfactory ingredients", "inferior results are likely to be attained with inferior ingredients" and so on... you cannot change the law of physics. what can change is one perceptions of what great quality or results are... and that happens over time as one truly starts to understand and feel through accumulated experience, not just paying lip service to the point of cliche, that the best ingredients one can attain, however humble, is the true, unerring foundation and irrefutable truth of haute cuisine as an artistic/artisanal endeavor. The key then, is how one defines respecting nature and products. Does one let a great ingredient (not luxury) speak for itself in its natural and rare beauty or is it respected by manipulation to the point where one can't tell how special it was to begin with? And we haven't even touched the humanity issues that Santi raised...I'm out. ← I believe that the real question here is one of viewpoint, preference, philosophy and definition. We clearly agree (I think ) that the best results are attained with the best quality ingredients. Where we begin to differ is in our views as to what is considered a 'respectful" way to treat these ingredients. One way (and indeed a great way) is to "let a great ingredient (not luxury) speak for itself in its natural and rare beauty," that is to treat the ingredients simply and cook them expertly as with the seafood at Rafa's, the Frog Hollow peaches at Chez Panisse Cafe or with the fresh pasta and tomatoes that were a revelation to me at Agriturismo Seliano in Paestum. Another way (and to me equal) is to simply utilize them to make something wonderful regardless of the technique utilized even if that ingredient becomes sublimated into another essence by virtue of the chef's alchemy. As one who appreciates variety and diversity, I do not understand the need for these approaches to be mutually exclusive. I loved dining at El Raco de Can Fabes and I loved dining at El Bulli. I do not believe that they are nearly as far apart in their approaches as Santi Santamaria would have us believe.

The point of disagreement is that any old carrot will do and that the ingredient's "special properties and provenance are nowhere in evidence" because of over-manipulation. It has not been my experience at the best of the vanguard restaurants that this is in fact the case. The manipulation I have experienced at places like el Bulli, Alinea, Arzak, WD-50, mini-bar and others has served to highlight special ingredients rather than obscure them. In some cases, however, individual ingredients have been sublimated into a new whole, but that new whole would likely not be as good if lesser ingredients were utilized. I fully agree with your statement that "one cannot take a mediocre QUALITY ingredient and turn it into a high quality dish." Disagreement with one point and agreement with the other are not in my opinion inconsistent. The important element is good cooking with high quality ingredients whatever the style of cooking utilized. Great results are not likely to be attained with inferior ingredients no matter the techniques used for preparation.

I don't think they said the same thing. There's a difference between "WOW" because I've never seen it before -and "WOW" because it's wonderful (wonderful things can be new - but not all new things are wonderful). I subscribe to the latter view. The word I use instead of "WOW" is "SING" (as in this food really sings to me). And I have pretty high standards for that - food doesn't sing to me very often. One way to tell if the food is "WOW" or "SINGS" is if you can remember a dish a year or two or ten later without looking at the menu - or pictures you took of the food (I don't take pictures but I do keep menus). I don't think I've eaten more than 10 meals that are "WOW" in the course of a lifetime - and perhaps there are a couple of dozen additional dishes - or even parts of dishes (like the lobster roll at David, Burke & Donatella) in meals where one dish or two was a lot than the rest. Robyn ← Robyn, you are correct that Sneakeater's and my definitions of "Wow" were not exactly the same, but they are also not mutually exclusive and both I think within Oakapple's use of the word. The key element is that for whatever reason the food is memorable for good reasons, similar to your use of "sing." I think the way I used the word, however, was a bit closer to the way you use "sing" as I have the impression that innovation is not really significant for you when dining. Innovation done well, however, is one of the things that floats my boat.

I don't buy that. If you put garbage in you still get garbage out no matter what you do to the product. On the other hand if a chef can make something special with inferior product than power to that chef. While I may or may not be able to distinguish the "terroir" of a particular product depending on the preparation, the base products still need to be of good quality. Ferran's point is that what makes particular items extra special is their inherent quality and not how rare and especially how expensive a product is. A good "x" is better than a poor "y". Often times we as a society value particular items because of their scarcity and cost and undervalue items of great quality because they are common. If a chef can elevate a "common" ingredient so much the better - what difference does the cost of the ingredient really make? Ultimately what matters is the pleasure able to be derived from the ingredients.

Someone has certainly seized an opportunity, but that doesn't mean we have to like it or support it. I certainly don't intend to even if it means that I may not be able to get a reservation for some fashionable restaurants. I also won't encourage others to support it. Instead I will do as I am doing here and discourage it even if my voice is lone and unheard.

I had the pleasure of meeting Bux and his wife, Esilda, once in person, but it was as if I had known him a long time. I always enjoyed reading his thoughtful well written posts. I learned a lot from him and respected him very much. He knew as much about enjoying food as anyone I know. R.I.P.

I'd rather pay an upfront reservation fee to the restaurant that would be applied to my bill. Better yet, I'd want that fee to be refundable upon cancellation reasonably in advance of the reservation - say 24hrs. Better yet, have no upfront fee, but leave a credit card with a penalty for no-show or late cancellation. I could deal with any of those, however, I do resent a "service" that prevents me from being able to make my own reservation because they have gobbled up all the tables for re-sale. Perhaps unethical is too strong a word. Dishonorable (if that still has relevance) might be more appropriate.

Alex, thanks for posting this. This is certainly consistent with what Santi has said and done in the past including his three part interview with Pedro Espinosa on eGullet that can be found here, here and here.

This and your other posts in this topic are outstanding and much appreciated. I think your analysis and assessment are spot on. There is no question that Santi Santamaria is a great chef, one of the most talented in the world and his restaurant El Raco de Can Fabes a great restaurant. I do not personally see why this must be an either/or situation. I also do not see the gradient between his cooking and that of Adria, Roca and others being nearly as steep as he does. He is also not averse to using relatively new techniques. Though fairly commonplace now, sous vide cooking has been known to occur in his kitchen. I will always remember with pleasure the leg of kid at Can Fabes that was cooked sous vide. Nevertheless he has always been bugged by the Vanguardists, which I think is unfortunate. Perhaps he is simply envious of the notoriety that they have received and the characterization, however incorrect, that that is all Spanish cuisine is about. I am happy that santamaria cooks the way he does as he does it so well. I am also happy that Adria cooks as he does for the same reason. I find both to be extremely exciting. The great thing at the world of Flavors conference this past Novemeber was that there did not seem to be a dichotomy between the vanguardists and the traditionalists.

I think that it is a problem and unethical if not illegal because it is taking a commodity that ought to be available to anyone at no cost, reserving it to make a profit. Their taking these reservation slots thereby make it more difficult for me or anyone else to be able to get legitimate reservations for personal use. I have no problem if I can't get a reservation because the restaurant is popular enough that others who will be dining there thought and acted first. I do resent them going to an under-the-counter broker though. As for the ticket brokers - if it wasn't for them it would be easier (and cheaper) to get tickets in the first place. There is a word for what they do - "scalping." At least they have to outlay cash and make an investment. The reservation brokers take at most limited financial risk. They are simply parasites on the system as far as I can see.

Rachel and others, thanks for the kind words. Somtimes putting this together has felt like I was writing War and Peace! I actually have more photos that I have been hoping to add, but I haven't had the sustained time blocs necessary for putting them up and I'm not sure at this point how much more they will add. We are getting down to the end with just one more installment to add. That should hopefully be up within a few days. It will bring us back full circle to Ferran Adria as the installment will focus on his small group breakout session, which I think is even more interesting in light of the just concluded Madrid Fusion 2007.

This is even more despicable than ticket brokers buying and reselling seats to Broadway shows or sporting events and I am not particularly enamored of them. At least with the latter they are having to outlay some cash.

This is a fascinating series that reminds me somewhat of Alinea's pre-opening documenttion right here on eGullet. Of interest from the article:

Oakapple can certainly speak for himself, but not being able to resist throwing my own $0.02 in, is that while everything is very competently imagined and produced, there really isn't anything to make one go "WOW!" At the end of the night it is another nice meal, though not necessarily particularly memorable. That was at least how I felt about my meal at The London Bar (other than the company that is ).

That doesn't surprise me. I am just not as familiar with Moore as I am with Simon.

I was just composing the following for the Digest: "The big news Thursday was revealed by Adrian Moore in his blog who wrote that “Le Cinq and Taillevent go from three to two, and Astrance, Le Meurice, Pre Catelan and Helene Darroze get three stars, with Constant's Les Fables de la Fontaine getting one star. Pic looks like the first woman chef to get three stars after Darroze..” He also noted that as already announced, Marc Meneau is in bankruptcy. Francois Simon in Figaro went farther afield outside Paris, stating in his article “The waltz of the stars” that Nicholas Le Bec in Lyon, also went to two stars, Marc Veyrat and Marc Westermann gave up their stars, the latter to start over again, and Jacques Lameloise in Chagny recovered his three stars." It's not clear how much is true or deduction or partial leakage from the December decisions. ← My suspicion would be that they have the real info. If they were taking educated guesses that proved incorrect, that could be a major embarrassment to their reputations. Though I could certainly be wrong I doubt that they would take that chance without some pretty solid information. I would think that Simon, at least, would have those kinds of contacts. I have no idea as to whether Moore might have the same level of contacts.

JohnL, I canot disagree with your last post. The conclusion to the post with which I opened this topic stated as much: While everyone is very talented, the place will have a difficult time as it stands making everybody happy. I happen to be comfortable in each of the styles that they represent, but I know many people who while finding something to be happy about will find just as much that they will be displeased with for the reasons you mentioned. I think this view, as you presented it is very reasonable and criticism along these lines justifiable. This is not what Cuozzo did, though. Whether or not his piece was an official "review", it was in fact a review. The problem is that it was a poor excuse for one, based on an "ew, this is icky" mentality rather than solid criticism. I admire the talent in the kitchen of Varietal, but have no stake in the restaurant. I don't mind it being criticized for valid reasons. I hate to see any restaurant butchered the way Cuozzo did to this one.

Another view of Comerc24 from The Independent. As yet I do not have an opinion on this restaurant not having experienced it for myself, but there appears to be a major disconnect with wide differences of opinion.

A couple of culinary giants - Ferran Adria and Thomas Keller - chatting after their book-signing session in The World Marketplace.

A couple of culinary giants - Ferran Adria and Thomas Keller - chatting after their book-signing session in The World Marketplace.

A photo from one of the book signing sessions.