docsconz

Once again, a fascinating report, Alberto, and good to see coming out of Italy. This has become a fairly common and in my view interesting approach lately. Ferran Adria himself told me last summer when I was at El Bulli that this is in fact one of the things he does at El Bulli. He feels that his cooking is very strongly based on Catalan traditions and ingredients even though he ultimately manipulates them into something completely new. Closer to what I imagine Peskias is doing is the talented young chef Enrique Olivera of Restaurante Pujols in Mexico City who is using modern concepts and techniques to reinterpret traditional Mexican cuisine. His results are marvelous. I personally think this is a good way to maintain a sense of identity while still being innovative. This is also a good way to be contemporary without succumbing to all the pitfalls of globalization. The cuisine of terroir is also good, although the concept is hardly novel - not that it needs to be. A recent meal at Chez Panisse Cafe in San Francisco is a prime example of this from within the United States. It is no wonder that Alice Waters is so respected in Italy and within the Slow Food Movement. Speaking of Slow Food it is heartwarming for me to see Slow Food and alta cucina sharing common ground. I have personally never seen them as opposed although I know others who have.

It may be better when he is not in the kitchen, but the diners still have the perception of his presence and personality, thus a sense of security and value whether there really is added value or not. I wonder what the perception of this restaurant is when the chef is not there at all?

The merlot is very good, but in general my preference is for the Rubicon. Although it is not meant to be read this way, I love the name of the winery - Meer lust. That encompasses a lot of attitudes towards wine.

I think it really depends on the restaurant, the chef and the diner. If the kitchen is well run the food should be neither better nor worse. Having the chef there though, especially if the chef is well known or a vibrant personality adds to the aura of a restaurant and may add to the experience of some diners. Conversely if a chef is known to be there frequently and is absent, the absence itself may be a disappointment for some dines adversely affecting their perception of a meal even if the quality is no different.

I think there are several differrent points being made on this thread. I don't think that anyone has suggested that the best available ingredients should not be used or that a particular dish derives its magic from a number of different areas including specific ingredients and terroir. I certainly cannot nor would not refute that. I also think that people are celebrating particular, special ingredients as well we should. No one is arguing against "truly fine cuisine". At this point I think we are all in pretty firm agreement. However, after this we begin to diverge. For all who are saying that such and such a dish can't be made or isn't the same, who really cares if it is the same? Why should I deprive myself of enjoyable food just because the experience of eating it is not the same as it would be if eaten in its natural habitat with the "proper" ingredients? Now mind you, I'm not saying it is a better experience or as good or making any value judgement on it other than it is pleasureable, the best that I can do or get and makes me happy eating it. Authentic is great and when it can be attained so much the better. This sentiment offers nothing against terroir. Terroir is wonderful. I wish I could afford to eat in Spain or California more often not to mention New York, Italy, France, Chicago and any countless number of other places, but then I would lose the wonderful terroir I have right here in upstate New York farm country. Unfortunately I can't have everything and sometimes I need to make trade-offs. I certainly agree with Milla's wine analogy to a point. While that wine may never be quite the same as the moment one fell in love with it, it can still elicit a spark of that memory and feeling or even be accepted on its new terms. I also hope that the analogy does not extend to other things as I would hate to discover that my Rancho Gordo beans are not as good when made in upstate New York than in California (then again that may be true to no fault of the beans ) I just don't understand why Jose Andres' statement as related by Pedro is so controversial. While not perfect the availability of good Spanish ingredients in the US is better than it has ever been and sufficient to allow for a good number of excellent Spanish-inspired dishes. In looking through this thread again more closely I think the controversy comes when specific examples are applied to the general statement. Certainly there will be specific dishes that are not duplicatable even if the setting can be set up a la virtual reality because the ingredients can not match those from the origen. I can't believe that was ever Jose Andres' point. I may not be able to make Castilian lechazo asado, but I can make a pretty good gambas al ajillo, pan con tomate and tortilla Espanola.

Interesting question, Chris. I'll throw in my $0.02. Just about every cuisine is the product of an on-going evolution. New England cuisine is no different as it begins to incorporate all the disparate elements you mentioned into a more cohesive whole. To be a local cuisine, I think, is to incorporate cultural influences of the people who live there and make the food along with the products of the region. A restaurant making ethnic food using imported ingredients certainly does not qualify even though it is made by residents of the area even if the food is common within the area. However, once that food starts using exclusively local ingredients or at least ingredients that are common locally even if sourced from outside, then the food starts becoming part of the local cuisine. So while the first element of New England cuisine is the population, the second equally important element is the produce. To me dishes that can satisfy both elements qualify as constituents of New England cuisine. Historically there are a number of dishes and products that have become associated with New England. Obvious ones include boiled lobster with drawn butter, creamy clam chowder and beans baked with molasses. A traditional American Thanksgiving dinner certainly has New England roots and I believe qualifies. The Portuguese and Italians have been large contributors to the evolution of this cuisine as well over the last century, although it is more difficult for me to define contributions as being particularly of "New England". Nevertheless, clearly they are there even if I cannot identify them in my ignorance. That other ethnic contributions may be more recent just means that they have not yet been as well incorporated into the fabric of the cuisines as the earlier influences. Indeed the locality of ingredients element may not yet be fully met to justify inclusion as part of "New England" cuisine at this time although their influences are certainly being felt. One difficulty facing any evolving cuisine nowadays is the ability to distinguish cuisines from one another as increasing globalization is leading a tendency towards homogenization that is as applicable to food aas it is to language and accents.

Alberto, I will be looking forward to thee installments with great anticipation. It is good to see Italian "alta cucina" awakening from a relative slumber. While Italian cuisine retains a very strong reputation in general, the sense I have is that the reputation of Italian fine dining has lagged a bit behind Spain, France, England and the US among western oriented traditions. One reason perhaps is a perception, true or not, that Italian fine dining has had in recent years a tendency to be less inventive or innovative and to incorporate less from other cultures than some of its cultural competitors. If true, one reason may be that the Italian dining public has been rather conservative and that most foreigners going to Italy to dine are quite content with exploring the more traditional cuisines. It becomes almost a chicken and egg situation.Italy's reputation is largely for its traditional cuisine and attracts people looking for it and understandably so. As such the climate is less conducive to developing a cuisine of culinary risk-taking. In addition, Italy's colonial past is less prominent than those of Spain, England, Portugal and France for example with fewer opportunities to incorporate disparate cuisines into the national milieu. Spanish, English, French and American high end cuisine has borrowed considerably from various Asian cuisines within the past 50 years or so. This is not as readily apparent in Italian cuisine. Perhaps it is me, but I got the sense that some of the quotes like Pierangelini's sounded almost defensive Even if a bit defensive, the approach is very Italian and sounds wonderful. If it leads to new directions of haute cuisine that are delicious and uniquely Italian that can only be a good thing for gastronomy.

Does anyone know where they are sourcing their chicken? Free-range, organic or basic factory? Price points? Good fried chicken is a special meal. I kinda like pan-fried myself, although deep-fried isn't a slouch either. Interesting timing to open a chicken venture with the potential for avian flu to become a a real crisis. I'm not saying they shouldn't have done it or that they have taken a big risk, I just wonder if that possibility was considered. It would have been interesting to have been a fly on the wall during that discussion. Fortunately for all the blips out of Europe, Asia and Africa it does not yet appear to have become a major major scourge (knocking hard on wood ). By all accounts in the Medical literature that I have read it is expected to arrive in the US in the not too distant future and has the potential to be truly devastating.

But Mouton Rothschild may have occassionally gained some Has Bruni reviewed that? Seriously, I agree that this was one of Bruni's better if not best reviews. I thought too that he actually captured the essence and nuances of the cuisine. I also think he did it without pandering to J-G-V for while he lauded this restaurant in the same article he essentially skewered some of his other undertakings including the late V Prime. I did not get this sense in some of his previous reviews of important restaurants.

Thanks, Wendy. It has been tough of late to coordinate times to finish our reports. That is the hard part about doing a tag-team approach as we tried not to duplicate photos.

It was definitely drool worthy.

It would appear that they left out a few elements. That was one of the funniest SNL skits I have seen in awhile...perhaps since the Narnia video. Funny that they both revolved around food.

But I think this forum has largely accepted Bruni's characterization of JG without properly evaluating whether or not we really should accept it or not. I obviously am skeptical, but am willing of course to hear other opinions. ← I neither accepted or refuted this position as I stated that I wasn't really in a position to do so. For me, I always enjoy creatvity, but for the frequency or lack there of that I dine there and what I go there for it really doesn't matter so much.

This is yet another fascinating glimpse into certainly one of the greatest minds of culinary creativity. That they consider very carefully each and every aspect of sensation is readily apparent when sitting at a table there and experiencing the cuisine. While in some circles offering instructions on how to eat particular dishes may sound pretentious, it makes perfect sense for their cuisine in order to experience it optimally. I have had situations elsewhere in which I wish I was given adequate instruction or correct instruction. One of the reasons I like to photograph food is that the image does tell me a lot about a dish and can instill specific memories from my other senses of dishes that I have had. One additional aspect besides the five senses experiencing external factors that effects a diner's experience is the diner himself. That is the condition, mental, physical and emotional that the diner is in at any given time while dining. I think this is much more difficult for the chef to control as it can depend on so many external variables. Was there an argument? Is the occasion special? What is the relationship with the other people dining? Are they enjoying the meal? Preconceptions? Is one already hungry or full? Is one feeling well? These and other elements go a long way in determining whether an individual will enjoy a particular meal or not regardless of the quality of the food. While it is dificult for a restaurant to control these things some restaurants do a better job of this than others. Some do better at making people feel relaxed or special. Others are good at defusing potentially aggravating situations. it was my impression that El Bulli was very good at all these things in addition to their cuisine.

It's about time Bruni wrote a review that was well written and on target in all aspects. It is also about time that J-G was re-reviewed. Interesting comments about menu stasis here. I haven't eaten there enough for it to be noticeable or make a difference to me if it is in fact the case. What I have eaten there though was good enough for me to eat ovcer and over again on the rare occasions I get to visit there.

It's about time.

No, I know a sophisticated, appreciative eater when I read one... you're definitely one of them. Not to belabour my love-fest for the doc, I truly do appreciate your comments. You're right in saying that this world is interesting is the different ways in which we approach them. I just really really wish I could appreciate Alinea and WD-50 the way you do... but my stubborn tastebuds just won't budge! Truly, I do expect to return to WD-50 someday. I really think that with so many people like yourself lovin' it that I owe it to myself, and eGullters like you, to give it another chance. u.e. ← Thanks, u.e., but you certainly don't owe anything to me. I post on eGullet because I enjoy doing it. I enjoy having a medium with which I can both express my culinary passion and share in others'. If my posts should be informative or (hopefully) consistent enough in expressing my tastes so that someone else may have a benchmark whether in agreement or disagreement so much the better.

U.E. One of the things that keeps the world interesting is that different people are in fact different with different tastes. Our tastes appear to overlap in some cases and not in others. I was trying to explain above what it is that appeals to me so much about this restaurant, realizing that your take was different. WD-50 and Alinea are two restaurants that are amongst my absolute favorites that you have been less enamored with. Perhaps if I were you I would take my recommendations with a grain of salt

Awwwww.... so that's the way into doc's heart... be present when he's eating Wylie's food! doc, when's your next visit? u.e. ← One will have to have already made one's way into my heart to be present when I am eating Wylie's food

First time and every time. The people I have been with as well.

As I had posted, I suspect that my disappointment with WD-50 had nothing to do with execution. Rather, my objections/disagreements were endemic to the concepts and combinations that Wylie/WD-50 is producing... the execution, I have no doubt, was flawless. u.e. ← I think this may be an area where we can pinpoint some of the discrepancies in our views towards specific restaurants. A lot of the combinations at WD-50 that you were less than fully enthusiastic about are really classic flavor combinations that are just presented in a novel fashion. In a case like the tongue and mayo, the dish really isn't breaking any new ground in terms of flavor. It is the technique and presentation that give life and inject fun and novelty into this dish as well as others on the menu. While I find the flavor combinations in these dishes enjoyable, it is the inventiveness, fun and whimsy that elevates them in my book. The other side of the inventiveness coin is a dish like the sunny-side egg that takes a very familiar form that ultimately defies its convention and turns out to be something marvelous but completely different than its initial appearance would have had us believe it to be. If the new flavors were not enjoyable in their own right the trickery and whimsy would have been for naught. That they ere new and pleasurable is what elevates the dish to its position as something special in my book. But Wylie and his crew do more than these tricks. In addition to playing with our sense of the familiar they also provide us with totally new and unique combinations that make both our tastebuds and minds delight and wonder, "how did they think of that?!" Does this happen with every dish? I don't know any place that can say that every dish works 100% for every diner. For me though it has been extremely rare that a dish hasn't worked for me on some if not many levels at WD-50.

Not in entire disagreement with that, but I think WD-50's kitchen needs him more than the others I mentioned above. Maybe I'll try to eat there on a Sunday. ← I'm not sure that I agree. I think that while Wylie does his share on the line his staff is very highly attuned to the cuisine and its technical nature. What Wylie and Sam both add is their presence and personality, something that I particularly enjoy above and beyond their food. Because they are both so visible when they are there, I think it adds to the enjoyment for people such as myself when they are in fact present as they usually are. I highly doubt, however, that the technical aspects of the meal would be significantly different in the absence of either or both. I think the fact that the presence or absence of either of them on any given night is so obvious (I should not exclude Dewey either as his personality also adds alot to the restaurant experience) by virtue of the visibility of the kitchen is both a virtue and a curse without the quality of the food necessarily differing at all. A lot of people simply enjoy knowing that the chef is in the kitchen on any given night. They find it reassuring whether or not it makes any tangible difference. That is easy to ascertain at WD-50. Conversely there may be a small element of disappointment to some diners when they are not there especially if they may not have been aware of the case before hand.

Indeed it has! Chez Panisse has a lot of history behind it. I can only assume from the quality of the food being served in the Cafe currently and six years ago that the restaurant remains outstanding as well. It is always good to be able to get some additional background and perspective on a place offering such long-standing quality, especially one that produced a revolution in food in this country. I will try to make it a priority to dine at the restaurant and maybe the Cafe as well next time I'm in the Bay area.

I know the feeling! There were plenty of restaurants we would have loved to go to but couldn't because of time and restaurant openings schedules. For example, very few of the restaurants we were interested in are open on Mondays or Sundays,, the two nights we actually had available in S.F. As a result we did not get to Quince, The Ritz or Masa's, three places that were on our short list. Ame was that much more amazing to us that it delivered so spectacularly on a Sunday night. That neither principle was in the house was a testament to the quality of the staff and proof that a chef's vision need not suffer in his absence. I would return there in a heartbeat.

I don't think Barcelona closes quite as tightly as , say Paris, but it is not the optimal time for a visit in that sense. Unfortunately, I can't help with the rest of your query.