"New Paradigm" Restaurants

[oakapple]

[T]here was also a claim asserted that the New York dining scene is dull, there's nothing to write about, etc.

Refuting that claim involves two main points: first, that it's fundamentally not true.... second, that the new paradigm and its precursor and related trends (gastropub, tapas, dessert bars, etc.) are exciting when viewed from the perspective of the new paradigm --  but when viewed from the perspective of the old paradigm (can we call this the docsconz/JosephB "Where's my spoon?" paradigm?) they're just crowded, uncomfortable, spoonless.

To some extent, Platt was just demonstrating that he needs a new job. But I think there's very little doubt that, comparatively speaking, the pace of new openings has slowed down in the last year. That doesn't mean there's zero, only that there's less than there used to be. It's the reason you find Frank Bruni struggling to find places to review.

I think I like "haute cheap" more than "new paradigm" because that brings together disparate styles and I can buy that being more of a specific trend though that did not start with Momofuku.

←

The other benefit of the label "haute cheap" is that it doesn't try to claim that the paradigm is new. Besides that, my other objection to this thread is you've got about 3 people claiming the paradigm applies to only 5 restaurants, and swatting away every other example as invalid.

Incidentally, for me the epiphany came not at Momofuku but at Upstairs. It was when I saw Jim Pechous banging out Bouley-level haute cuisine (and hamburgers) with just a plancha and a bunch of those little saucepots that I sat up and took notice.

←

Wasn't that the meal when you walked in, ignored the menu, and said, "Can you cook for us?" If so, that can't be represented as the typical experience at Bouley Upstairs.

[Fat Guy]

There is no typical experience at a restaurant where you can get sushi, haute cuisine, hamburgers and Italian food. My experience was typical in that no two tables in the restaurant were having remotely the same meal. I've also been back several (three?) more times and ordered in various a la carte permutations, and what I saw cemented rather than challenged my first impressions.

Relevant to this topic, last summer I was doing the eG Foodblog of the week and put up an entry about a party catered by Blais during his short tenure at Barton G's in Miami. The post is here. Looking back at my comments on the event ("I kept thinking it was like Ferran Adria’s bar mitzvah"), I see hints of new-paradigm reasoning:

The thing that was so neat, and amusing, about these stations was that you see similar food plated preciously at the high-end avant-garde restaurants, but here they were doing it for 300+ people in a buffet format, like, no big deal, this is just the food we’re serving today. It was really incongruous and wonderful, and maybe even a sign of things to come.

[docsconz]

Not all is golden in the world of "haute cheap." According to Eater.com

Kitchen 22, Charlie Palmer's fairly institutionalized Park South bargain spot, where once dinner was priced at $22, is closed for good as of today. His restaurant of the same name on the UWS closed in March, so this will mark the end of the Kitchen 22 experiment for Palmer's restaurant group. Officially, from spokesperson Elizabeth Matthews: "Kitchen 22 ran its course. Charlie is focusing on larger properties now." We're told, in addition, the company is working to reassign Kitchen 22 staffers, though we'll see how that goes. Word from the street is very little warning of the closure was given in-house.

A description of the now defunct restaurant from Citysearch:

The Scene

Charlie Palmer's high-concept redesign of Alva showers a young-and-lovely crowd with stylish, feel-good meals at penny-wise prices. A cozy alpine bar wrapped in chilly tones, flickering candles and high wood beams leads to a strikingly mod dining room. Informal servers sashay past plastic chairs and patterned booths, ducking enormous lampshades with cheerful insouciance.

I never even heard of this restaurant, but it seems to have at least tried to fit the paradigm of haute cheap. For whatever reason(s) it wasn't successful. Of note is the quote that "Charlie is focusing on larger properties now." It can't be easy being successful with an haute cheap concept as haute ingredients aren't cheap, especially if they are of at least decent quality and rents in NY aren't cheap. Places like Momofuku must make their money on certain dishes using other dishes to attract customers. Either that or serving spoons are really the major expense item for most restaurants and by limiting them they save a bundle - enough to operate the way they do.

[Fat Guy]

The Kitchen 22 story is interesting because the real original concept for that space can now be looked at in retrospect as a new paradigm precursor. Way back around 1990, before that space became Alva in around 1995, Charlie Palmer opened it as the Chefs and Cuisiniers Club, or "C&C Club" in the vernacular. The mission of the place was to be a late-night hangout for chefs. It never worked out (as Ruth Reichl wrote after the C&C Club closed and became Alva, "hangouts cannot be created; they have to happen.") Instead, Blue Ribbon became the de facto chef hangout of that era and C&C Club failed. When I see chefs' resumes the C&C Club seems to come up a lot -- I'd have to do a search to determine the full extent of it, but it does seem that a lot of the rising stars of that time passed through the C&C Club kitchen. The cuisine wasn't particularly haute -- it was more comfort-food oriented -- but part of the idea was that it was that sort of food, but being prepared up to serious professional chef standards (much as at Blue Ribbon). It's not connected so much to the haute-cuisine portion of the new paradigm phenomenon, but rather to the Bouley Burger haute-rustic part of it. Part of the reason I switched over to new paradigm as the designation, thanks to Nathan, is that it's a better descriptor of the phenomenon, but part of the reason is that "haute-cheap" was incomplete, because the new paradigm places tend to offer a mix and blurring of haute and rustic, and they're not necessarily cheap if you order a full meal of the most haute stuff.

[oakapple]

I paid another visit to Momofuku Ssam Bar last night, to try to get my arms around this alleged paradigm. As I was by myself, I had no trouble getting a seat at around 7:00 p.m. (Couples who had arrived before me were still waiting, since there weren't two adjacent bar stools available.) I actually had a pretty good seat, facing part of the open kitchen.

I decided to order two dishes at the opposite end of the Ssam Bar spectrum: something funky, something totally conventional. I started with the Veal Head Terrine ($13), mainly because I was alone, and my usual dining companions would have been totally grossed out. If you ignore where it came from, there's nothing gross about the Veal Head Terrine. Its bark is worse than its bite.

The terrine is served warm, in a roughly 6"×8" portion sliced as thin as tissue paper. Frankly, I think that if it were sliced thicker, but with a smaller surface area, it would pack a heftier flavor punch. At first, I spread it on the toasted bread provided, but the terrine was overwhelmed. I ate the last half of it without the bread. It had a slightly spicy taste, but was not anything special.

Then I ordered the Milk-Fed Four Story Hill Farm Poulard ($26). For the curious, Frank Bruni had a blog post about this the other day. The source is, of course, impeccable, and Chang's kitchen knew what to do with it. It was nearly as juicy and tender as you could want chicken to be, but nothing special was done with it. It was just chicken on a plate on a bed of warm leaf greens.

Actually, it struck me that if you ordered the chicken at Blue Hill, this is almost certainly what you'd get. I never had the chicken there, but I've dined at Blue Hill often enough to know the style. It would be the same quality of ingredients, and the same style of preparation. They do indeed offer a similar dish on their menu, and according to the website, it's $30.

This anecdote helps to debunk the idea that Momofuku Ssam Bar is "haute cheap." For what is almost certainly the nearly-identical entrée, Blue Hill is only $4 more. When you consider that dinner at Blue Hill has all of the traditional restaurant amenities, while Ssam Bar has almost none of them, you could even argue that Ssam Bar is over-priced.

(I am prepared for the David Chang Army to advise that Chicken isn't what Ssam Bar is about. Too bad. They serve it; I ordered it. It was an experiment to see what Chang does with something conventional. It was pretty good chicken, but something I'm sure dozens of other restaurants are offering. Perhaps this section of the menu is meant to be "Ssam Bar for Wimps," but it wasn't labeled that way.)

I can't make any direct comparison of the Veal Head Terrine, because Blue Hill doesn't serve anything like that. However, Blue Hill's appetizers are in the $10-16 range, and the terrine was $13.

Before tax and tip, the total cost of my meal was $55, including two glasses of the house sake at $8 each. Obviously if you think Ssam Bar is serving four-star food (which it isn't), you could call it "cheap" in a sense. But objectively $55 isn't a cheap meal, and of course Ssam Bar isn't serving four-star food anyway. It's pretty close to what you'd pay for dinner at Blue Hill, but a whole lot less pleasant.

Given that "haute cheap" isn't really that cheap, I'm not sure why Blue Hill isn't considered a New Paradigm restaurant. But apparently one of the rules of the New Paradigm is that only those who buy into the original concept are allowed to decide which restaurants qualify, and every other counter-example is brusquely swatted away. As I am sure Blue Hill will be.

Since my last visit, there seemed to be a better wine list and more serving staff behind the counter. Both of my selections were delivered without silverware. Neither one could reasonably have been eaten with chopsticks (though those weren't offered either). However, my requests for a knife and fork were quickly granted. The sound system played music at a noise level I found annoying.

There's been some debate on another thread about whether the New York Times review affected business. The server I asked said it had. He said people come in "all the time" and mention the NYT review. As far as I could monitor, most of the orders coming out of the kitchen seemed to be pretty conventional stuff. I did see one additional order of the Veal Head Terrine. In that case, I happened to overhear the server steering a couple towards that choice. It appeared that only the guy could stomach it.

Edited June 1, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Fat Guy]

Yes, that's the new paradigm in a nutshell: you walk in at 7pm without a reservation, order whatever you want (you could order one dish, many people do), and leave. It's not that the chicken costs half as much as at another restaurant, it's that it costs a little less and you can just order that plate and go. You can spend just as much on a meal at Momofuku as at a 3-4 star restaurant, but you can also spend $20-$30 and call it a night, or you can have a bowl of rice cakes with pork sausage. It's clear you don't enjoy eating that way, and assign no value to the options or the format, but there seems to be a generation of young foodies out there that wants that choice.

[oakapple]

It's clear you don't enjoy eating that way, and assign no value to the options or the format, but there seems to be a generation of young foodies out there that wants that choice.

←

Actually, I've quite obviously not been clear about it. I do enjoy eating that way. I just think the new-ness of it has been grossly over-stated; that the number of restaurants offering this format has been grossly under-stated; that several of the restaurants cited don't in fact even offer this format; that the format isn't really all that "haute" or "cheap"; and that the audience for the format has been completely mis-understood.

Other than that, Mrs. Lincoln, I loved the play.

Edited June 1, 2007 by oakapple (log)

[Nathan]

I ate at Kitchen 22. It wasn't haute. It was a bargain.

$25 for three courses (with a bunch of $25 and $35 bottles of wine).

first course was a basic cheap-bistro appetizer. second would be chicken or a skirt steak. third was a premade (and not very good...they were probably Bindi or Sysco) dessert

cheap...but not haute.

Edited June 1, 2007 by Nathan (log)

[MarketStEl]

Not all is golden in the world of "haute cheap." According to Eater.com

Kitchen 22, Charlie Palmer's fairly institutionalized Park South bargain spot, where once dinner was priced at $22, is closed for good as of today. His restaurant of the same name on the UWS closed in March, so this will mark the end of the Kitchen 22 experiment for Palmer's restaurant group. Officially, from spokesperson Elizabeth Matthews: "Kitchen 22 ran its course. Charlie is focusing on larger properties now." We're told, in addition, the company is working to reassign Kitchen 22 staffers, though we'll see how that goes. Word from the street is very little warning of the closure was given in-house.

[...]

I never even heard of this restaurant, but it seems to have at least tried to fit the paradigm of haute cheap. For whatever reason(s) it wasn't successful. Of note is the quote that "Charlie is focusing on larger properties now." It can't be easy being successful with an haute cheap concept as haute ingredients aren't cheap, especially if they are of at least decent quality and rents in NY aren't cheap.

←

(emphasis added)

Maybe he might want to ask Marc Vetri for his opinion and advice on the subject?

[Nathan]

and then there's Grayz....which may turn out to be NP....

http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/200.../grayz-anatomy/

[docsconz]

and then there's Grayz....which may turn out to be NP....

http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/200.../grayz-anatomy/

←

This strikes me as being more along the lines of L'Atelier than Momofuku.

From the link above:

Lunch dishes include:

Sauteed shrimp salad; calamansi remoulade.

Red bibb, quail eggs and crisped bacon; sweet chili vinaigrette.

Grilled snapper, pine nuts, raisins and fennel; saffron emulsion.

Short rib Croque Monsieur; roasted carrot, parsley root and tamarind chutney.

Chilled coulis of two tomatoes; three basils and lemon thyme oil.

Summer/fall vegetables; orange parsley jus.

Roast poussin “en crapaudine;” mustard, panko, creamed spinach.

Chestnut cavatelli; mustard panko, creamed spinach.

Dinner “finger foods” and dishes include:

Pasta fiori and tomato concasse; lemon thyme broth.

Weisswurst and Haendelmaier mustard; with pretzel.

Salt stone grilled langoustines; kaffir remoulade.

Chestnut truffle consommé; chestnut ricotta agnelotti.

Corn meal crusted calamari; lemon honey chutney.

Apple wood smoked salmon; hickory salmon caviar and bourbon maple syrup.

Oysters Rockefeller; “Grayz”

Layered truffle and foie gras roast; parsnip puree and port wine reduction.

Corn custard; porcini chanterelle stew.

Steamed black bass; ginger bouillon.

Saffron lobster linguini; fried artichokes.

Braised short rib of beef; creamed spinach and tarragon-horseradish emulsion.

One of the problems I have with the paradigm of a new paradigm is that it is really all over the place. The only thing consistent about it is that it does not fit into the mold of a traditional restaurant category. The realizations are all over the board, whether examples could include Momofuku, R4D, Grayz, Tailor, the late version of Varietal or wherever.

[Fat Guy]

The only thing consistent about it is that it does not fit into the mold of a traditional restaurant category.

The same can be said about postmodernism in any artform.

Gray Kunz has had one foot in the new paradigm, and the other foot firmly planted in the old, since long before the new paradigm was an utterance. I imagine as a restaurateur he will never be able to make the break necessary to be a real member of the club, just as Robuchon can't. They have already demonstrated, with Cafe Gray and Atelier, that they're constitutionally incapable of truly setting aside the spirit of fine dining. But the type of food, yes, Grayz will certainly serve postmodern haute fusion -- Kunz has always been on the cutting edge in that department.

[Nathan]

and then there's Grayz....which may turn out to be NP....

http://dinersjournal.blogs.nytimes.com/200.../grayz-anatomy/

←

This strikes me as being more along the lines of L'Atelier than Momofuku.

From the link above:

Lunch dishes include:

Sauteed shrimp salad; calamansi remoulade.

Red bibb, quail eggs and crisped bacon; sweet chili vinaigrette.

Grilled snapper, pine nuts, raisins and fennel; saffron emulsion.

Short rib Croque Monsieur; roasted carrot, parsley root and tamarind chutney.

Chilled coulis of two tomatoes; three basils and lemon thyme oil.

Summer/fall vegetables; orange parsley jus.

Roast poussin “en crapaudine;” mustard, panko, creamed spinach.

Chestnut cavatelli; mustard panko, creamed spinach.

Dinner “finger foods” and dishes include:

Pasta fiori and tomato concasse; lemon thyme broth.

Weisswurst and Haendelmaier mustard; with pretzel.

Salt stone grilled langoustines; kaffir remoulade.

Chestnut truffle consommé; chestnut ricotta agnelotti.

Corn meal crusted calamari; lemon honey chutney.

Apple wood smoked salmon; hickory salmon caviar and bourbon maple syrup.

Oysters Rockefeller; “Grayz”

Layered truffle and foie gras roast; parsnip puree and port wine reduction.

Corn custard; porcini chanterelle stew.

Steamed black bass; ginger bouillon.

Saffron lobster linguini; fried artichokes.

Braised short rib of beef; creamed spinach and tarragon-horseradish emulsion.

One of the problems I have with the paradigm of a new paradigm is that it is really all over the place. The only thing consistent about it is that it does not fit into the mold of a traditional restaurant category. The realizations are all over the board, whether examples could include Momofuku, R4D, Grayz, Tailor, the late version of Varietal or wherever.

←

I think that's at least part of the point.

[docsconz]

If that is indeed part of the point, I think the point is cheapened as it is simply trying to find the least common denominator of a vast array of styles. As much as the term "Molecular gastronomy" doesn't really fit what it was trying to describe, at least it was trying to put a handle on a specific subset of cuisine. The imprecision of the term "new paradigm" as I am understanding it based on this discussion is so broad as to be almost (but not quite meaningless) as it encompasses just about anything that doesn't fit into a traditional restaurant classification. Given that definition, all the fine dining restaurants that are tasting menu driven like elBulli, Alinea, minibar, etc. really would fit into "new paradigm" as they are not traditional restaurant styles even if they do incorporate many or all of the typical trappings of traditional fine dining. If the definition is tightened such that it takes all of the characteristics of Momofuku as defining then it becomes meaningless because there really aren't too many other restaurants (if any) that really fit that tight of a definition.

[Nathan]

chef-driven haute and rustic cooking combined in an informal, casual atmosphere.

[docsconz]

chef-driven haute and rustic cooking combined in an informal, casual atmosphere.

←

Given this definition let's look at specific restaurants to see how they fit. All the examples I will cite are chef driven and restaurants that I have personally dined at.

Momofuku - has a combination of haute cooking (e.g. uni dish) and rustic street food (e.g. ssam) in a very informal, casual atmosphere. This fits as it should as it is the model the definition was constructed around.

Room 4 Dessert - informal, casual and haute - yes. Rustic? I don't see it.

Bouley Upstairs - informal, casual and haute - yes. Rustic? I don't see it here either.

Blue Hill at Stone Barns - haute and rustic - yes. Informal and casual - though it is by no means stuffy nor classicly formal, it is not informal as it abides by the luxuries of haute cuisine.

WD-50 - Haute and informal - yes. Rustic - no.

elBulli - see BH@SB - same for Alinea.

minibar - see R4D

Topolobampo/Frontera Grill - incorporates both formal and casual, haute and rustic within the confines of a single restaurant though the styles are indeed segregated within that restaurant. In both cases it still conforms to traditional restaurant approaches.

Casa Mono - This actually fits the definition, though it remains a classic restaurant of a particular style. It didn't really break new ground other than being one of the first to popularize Spanish "tapas plus" in NYC.

L'Epi Dupin - This also fits the definition, though it started in the early to mid 1990'2 in Paris and fits into the category of "haute bistro"

Chez Panisse Cafe and Zuni Cafe - both clearly fit into rustic and casual. Though the haute is debatable, the quality of the cooking has been superb over the years and may be considered the forerunners of this trend in the US.

The styles of food vary amongst the restaurants and some conform more or less to traditional models. Based on the definition given here, I still don't see this as a new phenomenon unless tightened to the point of exclusion and irrelevance. If and when more restaurants spring up to emulate the specific style of Momfuku this can have real import as a movement or style. Until then, I see it as too generic and not new enough to be considered significant as a "new" paradigm. Of course, that can and might change and those who are calling it a new paradigm may in fact be quite prescient. For my part, I think that what Momofuku is doing is a fad rather than a movement as I don't think that certain elements of the service or lack there-of will translate well across the board. At this point the food produced is intriguing and novel enough and the place has enough of a vibe to transcend the lack of some comforts despite its not so inexpensive prices. Though my experience there was flawed, I can understand its appeal to some people. Whether that appeal will stand the test of time is another question altogether.

[docsconz]

Yes, that's the new paradigm in a nutshell: you walk in at 7pm without a reservation, order whatever you want (you could order one dish, many people do), and leave. It's not that the chicken costs half as much as at another restaurant, it's that it costs a little less and you can just order that plate and go. You can spend just as much on a meal at Momofuku as at a 3-4 star restaurant, but you can also spend $20-$30 and call it a night, or you can have a bowl of rice cakes with pork sausage. It's clear you don't enjoy eating that way, and assign no value to the options or the format, but there seems to be a generation of young foodies out there that wants that choice.

←

The lack of a reservation is another element that I didn't put in to the discussion in my previous post. That narrows the field down even further. This works at restaurants that are either not popular enough to be filled or restaurants that are so popular that it is a badge of honor to wait at. After awhile, this becomes old, although a place that fits many of the defined criteria would be Balthazar, although it is modeled on the formula of a classic French bistro.

[Nathan]

chef-driven haute and rustic cooking combined in an informal, casual atmosphere.

←

Given this definition let's look at specific restaurants to see how they fit. All the examples I will cite are chef driven and restaurants that I have personally dined at.

Momofuku - has a combination of haute cooking (e.g. uni dish) and rustic street food (e.g. ssam) in a very informal, casual atmosphere. This fits as it should as it is the model the definition was constructed around.

Room 4 Dessert - informal, casual and haute - yes. Rustic? I don't see it.

I don't think it's NP. dessert bars are a different new trend.

Bouley Upstairs - informal, casual and haute - yes. Rustic? I don't see it here either.

yup...the menu has a number of downmarket dishes.

Blue Hill at Stone Barns - haute and rustic - yes. Informal and casual - though it is by no means stuffy nor classicly formal, it is not informal as it abides by the luxuries of haute cuisine.

I don't think anyone would call it NP.

WD-50 - Haute and informal - yes. Rustic - no.

elBulli - see BH@SB - same for Alinea.

minibar - see R4D

not NP.

Topolobampo/Frontera Grill - incorporates both formal and casual, haute and rustic within the confines of a single restaurant though the styles are indeed segregated within that restaurant. In both cases it still conforms to traditional restaurant approaches.

separate restaurants...one is casual, one is haute. there are several clones of Frontera Grill in the midwest actually. see Campezuchi on Brady.

Casa Mono - This actually fits the definition, though it remains a classic restaurant of a particular style. It didn't really break new ground other than being one of the first to popularize Spanish "tapas plus" in NYC.

I think it was heading that way, yes.

L'Epi Dupin - This also fits the definition, though it started in the early to mid 1990'2 in Paris and  fits into the category of "haute bistro"

unfamiliar. I think Atelier is certainly an antecedent.

Chez Panisse Cafe and Zuni Cafe - both clearly fit into rustic and casual. Though the haute is debatable, the quality of the cooking has been superb over the years and may be considered the forerunners of this trend in the US.

I haven't eaten at either but from what I know, neither would fit into the haute camp.

The styles of food vary amongst the restaurants and some conform more or less to traditional models. Based on the definition given here, I still don't see this as a new phenomenon unless tightened to the point of exclusion and irrelevance. If and when more restaurants spring up to emulate the specific style of Momfuku this can have real import as a  movement or style. Until then, I see it as too generic and not new enough to be considered significant as a "new" paradigm. Of course, that can and might change and those who are calling it a new paradigm may in fact be quite prescient. For my part, I think that what Momofuku is doing is a fad rather than a movement as I don't think that certain elements of the service or lack there-of will translate well across the board. At this point the food produced is intriguing and novel enough and the place has enough of a vibe to transcend the lack of some comforts despite its not so inexpensive prices. Though my experience there was flawed, I can understand its appeal to some people. Whether that appeal will stand the test of time is another question altogether.

←

my guess is that it will for one reason: if Momofuku didn't exist, someone else would have to invent it.

today you have a larger number of young chefs trained at a four-star level than ever before (at least in the U.S., Italy, the UK and Spain). combined with a wider assortment of high-quality ingredients available than ever before. furthermore, you have a general zeitgeist amenable to cross-cultural influences. (in a word, a lot of it's just globalization.) combined with higher startup costs for a true fine-dining restaurant than ever before (and a dearth of front of the house staff).

these guys weren't going to just stick to bistro food.

[oakapple]

chef-driven haute and rustic cooking combined in an informal, casual atmosphere.

←

[Nathan]

chef-driven haute and rustic cooking combined in an informal, casual atmosphere.

←

It seems that that as soon as anyone finds a flaw in the latest exposition of the New Paradigm, a new definition is offered. Only those who believe in the paradigm in the first place are permitted to say which restaurants qualify. The many counter-examples offered by people like myself and docsconz are swatted away each and every time.

←

I believe this is the definition that I have always given.

[Fat Guy]

Only those who believe in the paradigm in the first place are permitted to say which restaurants qualify.

←

So . . . . the people who don't believe in it should be in charge of that?

[oakapple]

Only those who believe in the paradigm in the first place are permitted to say which restaurants qualify.

←

So . . . . the people who don't believe in it should be in charge of that?

←

I just think it's rather curious that not one example offered by anyone else has been deemed acceptable.

[docsconz]

Only those who believe in the paradigm in the first place are permitted to say which restaurants qualify.

←

So . . . . the people who don't believe in it should be in charge of that?

←

I just think it's rather curious that not one example offered by anyone else has been deemed acceptable.

←

I don't think that it is all that curious given the tightness of the definition. Certainly if taking Nathan's definition at face value, the field is wide open, but then it becomes clear that the paradigm really isn't new. What makes it a new paradigm perhaps follows more along Fat Guy's definition, which is haute and basic cuisine on the same menu in a casual atmosphere though not necessarily cheap. The only restaurant that clearly fits that bill to me is Momofuku. The problem is I see it is that one restaurant does not justify using a term "paradigm." Other restaurants that have been used to support the paradigm such as Bouley Upstairs or R4D do have some elements of the paradigm, but in general their paradigm isn't really new or totally consistent with that used to describe Momofuku. Bouley Upstairs doesn't really have the menu mix that MSB does and resembles many other restaurants that are casual offshoots of more haute restaurants. R4D is a dessert bar with modern trimming. While it is a relatively new concept, it isn't really mixing haute and basic desserts. It owes more to the Adriaesque Vanguardist movement than anything else.

At this point I see this new paradigm as being nothing more than wishful thinking, although it does have the potential to become a truly new paradigm if the Momofuku style really catches on.

[Dave the Cook]

. . . . .

Certainly if taking Nathan's definition at face value, the field is wide open, but then it becomes clear that the paradigm really isn't new. What makes it a new paradigm perhaps follows more along Fat Guy's definition, which is haute and basic cuisine on the same menu in a casual atmosphere though not necessarily cheap. The only restaurant that clearly fits that bill to me is Momofuku. The problem is I see it is that one restaurant does not justify using a term "paradigm."

. . . . .

←

It strikes me as equally likely that we believers haven't been done a good job of describing what it is we're seeing in places as diverse as Upstairs and Room 4 Dessert that sets them apart from their more obvious associations (respectively, perhaps, Bouley and El Bulli). I can't figure out which angle we've missed, but we'll get there, eventually.

But by the same token, non-believers might benefit from applying the same flexibility to what Nathan, Steven and I are calling new-paradigm restaurants as they apply to other categories. You can associate Moto and the Fat Duck with the Adriaesque Vanguardist movement while allowing for broad variances in approach and service; the same goes for the differing interpretations of fine dining on display at J-G and Daniel. The same variance applies to new-paradigm restaurants. None of them is likely to hit all of the marks even we believers have set out; that's just the nature of business, marketing and audience. But when I can walk into a place in jeans and order -- off the same dinner menu -- sushi-quality hamachi, a liquid nitrogen cocktail, something called "peach nigiri," a flatiron steak, or meatballs . . . I'm going to think that something is going on. When I can get them as part of a well-ordered tasting menu with wine pairings for less than 120 bucks, I'm certain of it.

[Nathan]

I don't think that it is all that curious given the tightness of the definition. Certainly if taking Nathan's definition at face value, the field is wide open, but then it becomes clear that the paradigm really isn't new. What makes it a new paradigm perhaps follows more along Fat Guy's definition, which is haute and basic cuisine on the same menu in a casual atmosphere though not necessarily cheap.

←

how does this differ from: "chef-driven haute and rustic cooking combined in an informal, casual atmosphere."?