Bux

I thought the long response was a good response. I am reminded of sauce Auchoise served with duck breast by Andre Daguin in Auch. As he described it, it was Bearnaise sauce with goose fat replacing the butter. To the uninitiated, it may sound gross, but it was quite delicious. On the other hand Bearnaise sauce is not something I eat a lot of these days. I hope you didn't overlook Steve Klc's dessert questions in this thread.

This page is now some half dozen years old, but perhaps still relevant. Tapas in the Parte Vieja. You'll also find some stuff on the Hotel Maria Christina and lunch at Restaurante Arzak in Donostia (San Sebastian) and the Hotel Restaurant Ithurria in Aïnhoa and the Hôtel du Palais in Biarritz as well as a few notes on Biarritz, Bayonne and the Pays Basque in France from 1996. The tapas in the Basque region are perhaps the best in Spain although I believe those of Andalucia will give them a good run for the money. Many of the better tapas bars in Barcelona offer Basque tapas. Finally, I would have to take issue with the very idea that tripe is gross. I believe it's callos in Spain where they are excellently prepared and I'm sure Wilfrid will back me up. Now that I'm reminded and the weather is turning cooler, what we need here is a big bowl of tripe stew with chorizos. I'm going to guess Wilfrid will back me up on that too.

And not that much easier on the upper east side these days.

As noted in the Crain's page, Bruno Jamais went to Ducasse after Daniel. That should have left him with a pretty special mailing list--though this should not be taken as an implication that he had access to any mailing list without express permission. Even without a mailing list, I'd assume many of the regulars at those two restaurants would be eager to find out what Bruno was up to and eager to be the first in the door. Richard Farnabe has a good resume having gone from Daniel to Jean Geroges and then on to open the Mercer Kichen for JG. Most recently he was at Lotus, where I understand he still consults. It's a little unclear to me exactly how open to the public this club will be. Needless to say, Crain's is not helpful on this score, but I suspect Wilfrid is correct in his assumption. I assume it should be the perfect venue for an eGullet dinner.

I'm happy to have you agree or take issue with what I said. I don't think there's any argument to be won or lost here. If I've offered any insight into Gagnaire's food or even if I've made anyone rethink his own reaction to the food, my post was valid. I think it's not only legitimate to have conflicted thoughts about the avant garde, but almost obligatory. I used the sense of destruction quite intentionally, because of the generally negative conotation, but also because there's often a necessary element of destruction in creation. To use a food related phrase, "you can't make an omelet without breaking eggs." A more positive spin might call this trasformation. I needed to make a distinction between the cook who transforms the raw material into an easily and immediately recognizable dish and what Gagnaire does. There's no question in my mind that Gaganire is far less in-your-face, in terms of technique regardless of what goes on in the kitchen. All that he sends out appears to be the result of cooking. In Adria's case, some things arrive at the table appearing to be science experiements. Of course I mean this in the good sense, although I can also attest to the fact that I have never enjoyed a simple roast chicken and green salad as much as the one my wife prepared on the day after we returned from France. I am looking forward to the free time to sit down and read through the Blumenthal Q&A, but it won't be for a while. I am intrigued that you asked about sweetness. Although I never got the opportunity compose a question and get it online in time, that subject was on my mind. With both Adria and Blumenthal, as well as with many others, but not with Gagnaire, I've experienced a blatent over riding sweetness in savory dishes. Turbot with fennel, apricot, and a Guiness-Jurançon sauce does not necessarily sound inviting, but having had Gagnaire's food, I can begin to imagine it with some understanding. Steve Plotnicki's post about naming dishes is interesting and the points are valid, yet I'm not sure the answer is in inventing new names. This could be the start of a new thread, but I think the trend towards including the ingredients started with Nouvelle Cuisine and the departure from classic garnishes which the enlightened and sophisticated diner might be expected to have memorized somewhere along the way of his culinary education. (I suspect that's hardly true, but at least there was a standard reference point.) As Gagnaire and other chefs are improvising more than they are codifying dishes the way Escoffier did, the dishes are more likely to be transient, I don't see the use of naming them. On the other hand, a list of ingredients is rather pointless too as they don't describe the dish.

That's what we're here for. My impression was that they still offered a cheese tray or cart, but that the tasting menu featured a preparation by the chef or what the menu refers to as un fromage cuisiné. This is a far greater issue for me with chefs other than Gagnaire. Adria's caramels come to mind immediately and so does my meal at Heston Blumenthal's Fat Duck where I felt the sweetness increase perceptibly from course to course throughout the meal. I still shudder when I see fruit in a fish dish, yet I've been eating that combination for years at Daniel in NY in one form or another.

This is another subject worthy of it's own thread and maybe several separate threads. I also love the cheese cart and am disappointed when the meal leaves me so full that I can't enjoy a selection of cheese. I also don't care for the chef's preparations that include cheese as a substitute for the cheese tray, yet my curiosity is such that I will often order it in lieu of the cheese tray. Invariably, I am sorry I did. This was the subject of a thread somewhere on eGullet. Finally, there is the issue of red wine and cheese--one of the long standing traditions in French dining. I am finding more and more combinations of white wines and cheese that are far superior taken out of the context of a meal and also finding more and more people who share that opinion. Sancerre and chevre is almost an ideal pairing, yet Sancerre is not what I want to drink after a big red wine or even after a little Cote du Rhone or Beaujolais. There is something about the order of wines in a meal that is as important as any pairing with food. I think there are many foods that call for a white wine if eaten as an appetizer and a red if had as a main course, but I digress. Perhaps we'll have separate threads on some of these issues.

My expectations were that I might be astounded or disgusted. The only way the meal could have not lived up to my expectations was if I was just bored. I don't think I misread your post. I think our impression of Gagnaire is similar. At anyrate this meal, although far less impressive than our first (life is like that as we get jaded) solidified my respect as well as my understanding that no dinner there would ever be a series of "sure things." You say "his blending of flavors work ---- they taste good." I think that's a key thing, although I suppose it's also subjective. Gagnaire's was hardly the only creative food we had these past two weeks and I found myself wondering why I defend him, yet question the food of some of the other chefs. I can't discount the stars and the prejudice it brings, nor can I dismiss the service and setting all of which help seduce the diner. In the end however, I am more convinced it is the food that succeeds and "the blending" of flavors is key. Somehow, in many other creative restaurants in France and in most American "fusion" restaurants, I can taste the separate flavors distinctly and in a way that reminds me they are an unusual combination. It's a distraction and I'm aware of a contradiction in my mouth. Earlier, in fact soon after eating there, I said "One of the hardest preconceptions to give up is what a particular ingredient should taste like." This is another way of looking at that "blending." To an extent Gagnaire successfully destroys the flavor of an ingredient to come up with a new flavor. I think a lot of people find this offensive both intellectually and as a gut reaction. It certainly is an approach that is at odds with a line of other chefs I admire and it's at odds with my own usual preferences. So what? It doesn't keep me from both admiring and enjoying Gagnaire's work. If a chef is going to take me in this direction, he had better be damn good however, and Gagnaire is. I do not recall argon oil, nor do I see mention of it in the menu. We had the tasting menu and they were kind enough to have a souvenir menu prepared for us to take with us. There was a thread once on asking for menus. I suppose people ask for menus for different reasons and it certainly seems as if restaurants make them available with different thoughts in mind. If I can find that thread, I'll pick it up again as the responses to our requests for a menu were met with vastly different responses and often with a useless piece of expensive paper that bore no relation to what we ate or the carte from which we ordered.

And therefore it's difficult. It's the complicated dishes that are usually easy. The simple ones require perfection. There's no room for error and no place to hide. In essence they only sound simple. This weekend we had dinner at the Domaine des Hauts de Loire, a lovely inn not far from Blois whose food I haven't heard much about, although it has two stars. The maitre d'hotel, perhaps encouraged by the smiles on our faces, stopped at our table and we offered compliments on our simple but wonderful eel salad. He smiled and said that it was the simple dishes that are the most difficult to prepare well. I'm happy to hear that l'Ambroisie has a lighter atmosphere. When we were there, I found the somber room, almost funereal and as much as I consider it a temple of haute cuisine, I found the food anything but dead. It was truly some of the most exquisitely prepared food I've ever had. I found the staff more formal than snooty. I thought they were professional and helpful enough then, but it sounds as if the change is for the better.

To me, that makes it sound a bit as if you are doing the right thing for the wrong reason. If nothing else, it makes a political statement where I'd question the need or value. If you believe you can use butter or cream judiciously, why not use them--or better yet, why did you feel it was necessary to make a statment of this kind and for whose benefit was it made? I am someone who loves the taste of butter, but who is far more likely to saute food at home in all or mostly olive oil. By the way, I also love goose fat and believe it is actually one of the healthier fats although I don't have its composition in terms of saturated and unsaturated fats handy to quote.

Bux, It was an anomaly. Go again. Certainly the food merits a return, but a really good restaurant can't afford to have a second rate staff serve some of the guests. One should have better than a fifty-fifty chance of reasonable service at a two star restaurant. Certainly Regis Macon cares about his guests and although carving the lamb in the dining room might lead some to question who's cooking in the kitchen, I found it a very warm gesture, but it didn't compensate for the loss of the white wine not served nor for efforts I had to make to see that the red wine did not suffer the same fate. But certainly, I won't go out of my way to avoid the restaurant if we plan to be in the area.

Allow me to mention l'Ecole de Cuisine du Domaine d'Espérance. This is a small school with a professional chef/instructor located on a family estate in Gascony. They run a few sessions during the year.

I was going to suggest la Regalade. Of course, when considering convenience and location, will you have luggage and where are you staying. the 14th may be closest to Orly by taxi, but it you're carrying lots of baggage and staying in the 17th, it's another story. My late night suggestions are much like my Sunday suggestions--a good old brasserie and simple food or oysters. Let others knock the Flo group, but they have at least preserved the decor. Vaudeville with it's terrific marble art deco interior serves until one, as does as does the new and very modern les Grandes Marches. As a last resort at the last minute, we tried the latter with some family on a Sunday a while back and found the food quite fine although more upscale contemporary restaurant style than brasserie style. I found the interiors quite attractive as well, although the ground floor was closed for renovations. Le Dome in the 14th would be another suggestion. Conveninece might make the difference to me between those places.

This is one of the few French restaurants in which we've had meals over a number of years. in fact it was twenty years between our first visit and the second one. Both of those meals were superb, we thought. I recall the first dinner when we chose a creative tasting menu over the traditional tasting menu. Of the dishes I still recall, a sandre crusted with unusual spices stands out some decades later. By our second visit, the tradtional food of France had evolved and the offering now was only a single tasting menu of a contemporary classic nature. This meal was excellent in it's own right. A few years later (about two years ago from today) we dined at Leon de Lyon again, but felt a bit let down. We hoped it was just our mood, or the fact that we had eaten so many other great meals in quick succession that week. I recall however, that there was a separate listing of very classic dishes. I suspected that some of them had disappeared from the menu for a while and were being revived. That you sensed a lifelessness about the service is sad for us, as we have such fond memories, albeit of two out of our three visits. One of the interesting things about the difference between our first and second visits is that they enlarged the restaurant, but removed several tables and served fewer diners. At the time, I thought (and suppose they did as well) that this would get them their third star. Both of those meals seemed as good as it could get. Unfortunately, the last meal was good, but not quite the same experience.

I am sorry to hear of the poor wine service at your first meal. It mirrors the service, or should I say a lack thereof, we experienced early this spring. I won't go so far as to say it ruined our meal, but it certainly detracted from what would otherwise have been an almost perfect dinner and stay. I liked our accommodations and the service in the inn and the restaurant were superb aside from the service of the wine. Regis, himself, carved our lamb at the table, but we just never got about half of our white wine and it was a constant effort to ensure that our red wine was served while we were still eating our lamb. I'm of the opinion that tasting menus are often the way to go, but this was one place where I felt I did better by ordering the omble chevalier and the lamb in hay (bread crust) a la carte. The amuses were numerous and fascinating as well as tasty. I'd look forward to returning if only I could believe our wine service was an anomaly. I am seeing less and less smoking in fine restaurants in the provinces. It's also true that the economics of real estate allow a greater spacing of tables in the provinces than in Paris, so smoking has been less of a problem for me in the countryside anyway. Quite frequently we will think we're in the non-smoking section of a restaurant only to finally see someone light up late in the meal. As an ex-smoker, I have only a little understanding for smokers to begin with, but I truly don't understand how anyone can smoke between courses. Naturally, if one can, I suspect it doesn't dawn on that person that others are so annoyed. It's far easier for me to comprehend the attraction of cigars. I have, on this last trip, stated to say we'll have our coffee in the lounge when my wife reminds me that I really want to enjoy the smoke free dining room a bit longer. While I wouldn't mind relaxing in a lounge chair with my coffee, I think it's an excellent compromise when a restaurant has a lounge available for smokers after dinner. I'm more than willing to give up the comfortable chairs to those who have been kind enough to hold off smoking until their coffee.

Bouchons are a local Lyonnaise sort of bistro. They're small informal places serving typical food and regional wine--such as beaujolais, but they are by no means a place for a quick meal or snack. Lyonnaise food is generally heavy food and one is expected to have three courses, although these days many people often seem to have just two dishes--either an entree and a plat, or a plat and a dessert. In France, reasonably enough, an entree is the name of your entry course, not your main course. I associate Lyon with tripe and andouillette and tablier de sapeur are two of the most Lyonnaise dishes I want when in Lyon. Basically, we're talking chitlins--rolled in a casing in the form of a sausage in andouillette and a flat piece of stomach that's breaded and fried for the latter which is loosely translated as fireman's apron, although as earlier discussed on this board, a sapeur is actually some sort of military engineer. In any event, neither of these are exactly delicate or haute cuisine, but they represent Lyon to me and unlike frog's legs and snails, they haven't crossed the ocean. Other traditional Lyonnaise foods include tripe stews, sausages and potato gratins. I've always thought of frisee, lardons, croutons and soft boiled egg as salade Lyonnaise, but Patricia Wells says there should be herring as well. On the whole, France is becoming very homogenized and rather international. Lyonnaise cooking is less evident than it used to be. Paul Bocuse has opened several bistros in Lyon. All are reported to be decent and good value. We've eaten in Sud, his bistro devoted to Mediterranean foods. It was okay, but with it's Provencal-Italian-North African influences, it seemed more like something I'd expect to find in NYC, than in Lyon. Offhand, I can't recommend a particular bouchon and I've heard that some of the really old established ones have become very touristic with an accompanying loss of quality.

Patrice, how long ago were you there. We ate at Bistro Bellvue and enjoyed it very much. We had reservations at Cafe de Paris and had to cancel twice. We never got to eat there and I was sad, on the basis of my meal at Bistro Bellvue, not to also eat at the upscale Cafe de Paris. I had been led to believe that the two chefs who were cooking there then, are now at Le Dauphin, a little bistro on the rue St. Honoré in Paris, but I see the same two names listed for cafe de Paris over the past few years in Michelin, although it appears that they have also had, or may have, some connection with the bistro in Paris as well. La Galupe in Urt is excellent and has what is reported to be the best boudin noir in all the Basque Country if not the world. It may also be the place I almost ate myself to death. It was not just that I risked bursting from the sheer quantity, but that I drove away from the restaurant after too much food and wine. Fortunately we were quickly aware I could barely stay awake and we pulled over for a nap. Yes, that salmon, they brought around a beautiful salmon for show and tell. We rejected it in favor of the blood sausage and some good old southwestern cooking--foie gras and duck, but after placing our order, I had second thoughts and called the waiter back to see if we could split an order of the salmon and add it to our lunch.

"Relinquishment," may be deceiving if it implies giving up a control they once had. I suspect those dishes were always listed at the restaurant's choice. I assume the local wines listed are also named by the restaurant. I don't see a problem with two or three star restaurants listing any dish it wants to list. I don't think there should be a mediocre dish on the menu. As for one star restaurants, they are often rather mediocre unless they are in an area known for great food. One star only means that it's better than whatever else is around. In any event Michelin has limited itself to the form it's taken over the years and I suspect a restaurant knows what it does best and for what dishes their is a great demand.

With growing local autonomy in the semi-autonomous parts of Spain--Galicia, Catalonia and the Basque Country, even Michelin has started toolist San Sebastian by it's Basque name--Donostia. (And Pamplona is now Iruña.) Akelare and Zuberoa are the only two star restaurants in the area. Arzak and Berasategui are the three stars. All this courtesy of the 2002 Michelin guide. Annoyingly, none of the Basque multistarred restaurants are really located adjacent to hotels. It's much the same in Catalonia.

I believe the tasting menu was listed as the "October" menu. It started with some raw or marinated scallops and salmon. There was an oyster and tete de veau dish and a squid, crayfish and kidney dish among others. The meat, or last savory course (not counting the non sweet desserts) was duck and venison. The desserts varied in sweetness although nothing was cloying or even really very sweet. They were however closer to traditional desserts this time around.

Bunny, I am in France now. Could you contact me after the first of November when we return. I hope I can offer some good advice. It's really difficult for me to say much from a cybercafe. First I have things I want to do here that, of course, I can't do back home in NY. Then, it's realy difficult to type here as they've switched all the keys on me. I seem to recall that the Carlton has reasonably inexpensive rooms. It's a very nice hotel, but it has rooms, if I'm not mistaken that are less than 100 euros. If you don't have a reservation by the time we get back, my wife can check her consortia rates for the Carlton. I'd question the need to dine at Bocuse. As a matter of history, you can't deny Paul Bocuse's importance, but his current relevancy may be questionable. It's also a very expensive ride by taxi. One can eat very well in Lyon for the price of a one way fare. Find Lizzie's post on Auberge de L'Ile. I've not eaten there, but she makes a compelling argument for the restaurant. Les Loges, Leon de Lyon and Orsi might be my suggestions from experience. Lyon is also a place to eat tripe and I'd suggest it in the form of an andouillette. Do not expect anything like what you may find posturing by that name in Louisiana. This is French soul food and the thing many of us crave more than haute cuisine. In fact, if this is your first trip to France, you need to experience the unique foods that France has to offer.

We had our dinner at Gagnaire the other night. maybe I'll get to write something of a real report when we return to NY, but the short report is that we enjoyed dinner very much. I suspect it's not everyone's food and we might have questioned a few things ourselves, but it was a great dinner experience and that means it was delicious on the whole. We've eaten there once before--that was the year it opened in Paris. At the time we were astounded, but absoltely hated the desserts. We were probably less astounded the second time, but this is after two meals at El Bulli, one at the Fat Duck and numerous other meals of note. On the other hand, we didn't hate the desserts this time. We even loved a few of them. There was some trepidation about spending what was guaranteed to be in excess of five hundred dollars for two after hearing some reports which led us to worry that Gagnaire had gone over the top, or off the deep end. On the whole we found him to be a chef very much in control and I was happy to honestly say that to him when he greeted us on the way out. Nothing in life is really perfect, but I understand the need many diners have for a perfect dinner at these prices. Nevertheless, perfection doesn't exist at the cutting edge and if you want to understand contemporary haute cuisine at its very "hautest," you need to experience Gagnaire and to do so, you need to dine without preconceptions. One of the hardest preconceptions to give up is what a particular ingredient should taste like. With luck, I'll continue this thread on my return.

Well we're game for Monday. We leave for the provinces on Tuesday morning. I really enjoyed meeting David and Marc and his wife Nikki. (sp?) I am still trying to figure out if C'amelot was a terrific restaurant, or if it was the company. I suspect it was both.

I often want to kick myself for forgetting to look at the listing in the guide before I enter the restaurant. The wines listed in the Michelin are also a good place to start if you're looking for local wines and good value. It's my understanding that the restaurants in question supply that list of dishes and wines, so this is their own list of what they feature or feel they are, or should be, famous for serving.

What are you, a psychiatrist? No, a psychologist! Smile when you say that. In that case you may know why I do what I do better than I do. In either case I'm not losing any sleep about not knowing why I do what I do or not knowing if you know.