Great Restaurants that are no more

[julot-les-pinceaux]

No, the actual dishes, with their perfect and rare balance in the execution, etc., were absolutely something that could have been found in a good auberge back in the 1950s or 60s, just as I wrote. I do not believe in the existence of any gap between that exceptional cuisine, which I call "popular gastronomy" (now disappeared), and what you call "grand restaurant". This is a modern, artificial characterization and segmentation of cooking that I do not agree with.

Ducasse, anyway, came later with a different style, and different priorities, leading French cuisine further away from its roots, but the fact that the roots are no longer visible does not mean they never existed. And they had nothing to do with "grand restaurant" style.

←

I cannot know about the 50s, and I am willing to believe you -- to some extent, it is indeniable that all Loiseau, Peyrot, Robuchon or Pacaud do, is to implement old, formerly well-known technique. Was the general level of cooking better before I was born? Does it really matter now? I would agree that the style of those great chefs has a lot to teach to everybody's cooking today.

But you seem to agree that great cooking in the sense of exceptional ingredients and exceptional skills and care and their preparation are a rare resource now. I do not know what you refer to when you say "grand restaurant" -- if there is today a place where I can eat food like Peyrot's for cheaper, I am very interested -- and unaware. Meanwhile, it is just a fact that delicious food requires manpower and rare skills, and therefore is expensive. If your point is that a number of convention associated with the restaurant are pointless, I agree. If it is that grand restaurant is useless today, I think it is in contradiction with exactly what you say, since the ability to do quality stocks, for example, is today concentrated in the three-stars and is precious.

[Ptipois]

I cannot know about the 50s, and I am willing to believe you

The 60s, as far as I'm concerned...

Was the general level of cooking better before I was born?

It was, shall I say, fairer, in the sense that not just rich people had access to excellent cooking, that excellent cooking was not only found in expensive restaurants, and that good cooking was better distributed on all levels of society. Of course bad food has always existed, which makes the study of this matter tricky. But I am describing a past reality: housekeeping was taught at school until the late 50s, family transmission was still very active, and many more people were familiar with the act of cooking that there are now.

Does it really matter now?

Well, of course it does. Especially insofar as you doubted the validity of my comparing Peyrot's cooking to the kind of fare that used to be found in the most respected country auberges.

I would agree that the style of those great chefs has a lot to teach to everybody's cooking today.

You are still not getting my point. I am not only talking about chefs. What I am talking about is cooking. Cooking, and I also mean cooking at its highest level, is done not only by chefs.

But you seem to agree that great cooking in the sense of exceptional ingredients and exceptional skills and care and their preparation are a rare resource now.

They are a rare resource, and also, regarding French cooking, they are overprofessionalized. Now it is all in the hands of a few experts. I am not complaining about it, just stating a fact. That is where things stand now. They may change, they may last, I don't know.

I do not know what you refer to when you say "grand restaurant"

I am only using your own terms.

Meanwhile, it is just a fact that delicious food requires manpower and rare skills, and therefore is expensive.

It is, now.

If your point is that a number of convention associated with the restaurant are pointless, I agree. If it is that grand restaurant is useless today, I think it is in contradiction with exactly what you say, since the ability to do quality stocks, for example, is today concentrated in the three-stars and is precious.

←

But that was not my point at all.

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Ptipois, why is it that I can never disagree with you?(Still not sure what your point was, but agree with everything you said).

I promised I would write about Loiseau. I loved that man. There was more to him than the exuberance everybody knows about. He has a very special status in fine dining, because he was not one of those extraordinary skilled men, a know-it-all about cooking like the Troisgros or the Robuchons. As he said when provoked on the topic, "Je t'emmerde. Je sais pas faire une bearnaise, mais je suis le meilleur". And to the extent that being the best can mean something, he was then.

The striking thing, which he choose to emphasize sometimes to extreme points in his last years, was the simplicity of his style of cooking. I guess in the end, Passard is closest tot his style of emphasising the world of tastes, subtlety contained in the most simple ingredients when they are prepared with the utmost care. In that regard, I loved the assiette de crudites de la cote d'or. It was just that: some exceptional, freshly sliced ham and or salmon, celeri remoulade, graded carrots. And that was like having never eaten before. There was no secret ingredient, no spices, what you see is what you get: but a relentless quest of the best ingredients, and a jewelry like attention to the seasoning -- no cooking in that case. The fact that this was prepared on order was also essential: carrots were hand-chopped on order, just like all vegetables he served.

Another incredible memory were the amuse, giving that same sense of pure tight rope walking in ridiculously simple preparations. The tartelette de foie de lapin just had, on pate brisee, a mirepoix of vegetables in a light mayonnaise (I suspect using low fat yoghurt), and a little rabbit liver on top, sauteed in the last minute. That was all about the nobility of the liver, the complexity of its taste, with the contrast of textures and the counterpoints brought by the vegetables taste. Each bite of that lasted second and was, literaly, heavenly, immaterial.

Caviar d'Aubergine wrapped in local raw ham, a few drops of balsamic vinegar was another incredible amuse -- just try it home. The ham is very tasty and salty, not the Parma kind, the eggplant rich in taste and very onctuous.

It is often said that, in great restaurants, you have only the best. That was true of la Cote d'Or -- I don't remember being served a non exceptional ingredients (there were accidents like everywhere, but still).

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Two more great dishes -- I can't help it. Those two still available in Saulieu.

The poularde Alexande Dumaine has truffles under the skin, a stuffing of sous vide cooked vegetables, truffle and foir gras, and it is cooked in a clay pot, made hermetic with cloths, in a steam of chicken stock, truffle juice, Porto and Madeira. It is better to have it for two persons, because then it is served when the breast is perfect, and the thighs finish cooking in the kitchen while you eat the first serving. They bring the pot in the room, undo the cloths, open the pot, and an intense smell of truffle make every head turn in the room. They carve the bird, and serve you the breast, the stuffing, someimes some baby leeks, alwazs some truffled rice. But mostly, they pour the liquid of the pot in the plate as well -- it is thick, foir gras-y, intensely intense.

The Loiseau Saint Honore is a miracle. I don't know how it is done, but it is a real saint-Honore, yet light. Tons of vanilla and little sugar, for sure, and no kirsch. A sable at the bottom. This dish defies my description abilities -- but just go taste it (the new pastry chef is former Lucas Carton).

I would talk about the sandre, fondue a l'echalotte, sauce au vin rouge -- but I don't want to take all the room.

[Ptipois]

Julot, I gather that you have dined at Loiseau when Loiseau was alive. Have you dined at the place in recent years? If so, has it changed a lot? Have they managed to maintain the same level of quality?

[John Talbott]

Julot, I gather that you have dined at Loiseau when Loiseau was alive. Have you dined at the place in recent years? If so, has it changed a lot? Have they managed to maintain the same level of quality?

←

Pti, I'm butting into this private coversation to say that while I have not eaten in Saulieu since the '75-'85 height, I rather admired his translation/transition into the Tante's in Paris.

[Ptipois]

I have never dined at any of the Tantes. How was it?

[John Talbott]

I have never dined at any of the Tantes. How was it?

←

Well his first one was Tante Louise in the 8th nr the Madeleine and was not only vastly less expensive than Saulieu but fairly close to what I remember the food to be there; my French colleagues who are not known for their food passion, liked it a lot. It was surprisingly good food and I always suspected that Loiseau paid a lot of attention to it and maybe spent a lot more time there too, I mean I saw him always every time I went, which was not true of his other two.

The second one was Tante Marguerite nr the Assemblee Nationale and had a more elegant decor and a bit fancier cooking (as befits the clientele who were largely government-connected). Again, if memory serves me, it was a bit farther away from Saulieu's cooking; I can still taste their pied de porc.

The third, last and no longer in existence one was Tante Jeane in the 17th and the four of us found it lacking the ooompf. Its decor and clientele were somewhat between the other two and why it failed, I don't know.

How they are today I don't know; I went to Tante Marguerite after Loiseau's death just to see if they were going to change (what was to me a winning formula) but it was pretty much the same.

[John Talbott]

Ironically, I was just scanning the end of the week papers for the Digest and learned from Friday's Les Echos that Jean-Louis Galesne reviewed places in Beaune, the first of which the the Loiseau company's Loiseau des Vignes that (I believe was planned before his death and) features a winelist of 70 wines (largely Burgundies), ranging in price per glass from 2-45 Euros for 8 or 12 centiliters in a bistrot that is apparently quite successful.

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Julot, I gather that you have dined at Loiseau when Loiseau was alive. Have you dined at the place in recent years? If so, has it changed a lot? Have they managed to maintain the same level of quality?

←

Pti (may I call you Pti like John does?),

The quality, like the executive chef, remains, but the style of cooking has slightly changed. Ingredients are as mind-blowing as ever, as are cooking techniques-- so the basic thing, the feeling that you never had carrots or potatoes before, remains. The mushrooms plates are still like a lecture -- who knew it could be that good, fruity and earthy at the same time?

The style is less brutal, more the cuisine of a Chef than the kind of "cooking 101" that Bernard liked. For instance, the langoustines have some orange zests now -- very delicately flavouring them. The cote de veau is cooked more gently and classicly -- Bernard liked it cooked on a very strong heat, very quickly, so the outside would inevitably be a little dry and the taste very meaty. There are now many plates with two sauces. There are spices and unexpected flavours like the play on pine tree aromas.

The house itself has become one of the most georgeous places in France, for one because investments made all over the years are paying off, in particular the garden became luxurious, the rooms amazingly equipped and refined. And the city of Saulieu just renovated the street, which looks less "far east" now.

It is strange to say, but the other thing that makes the place more pleasant than ever is that Bernard Loiseau is not there anymore. The atmosphere is more relaxed, no one wanders around anymore, asking everyone "am I not the best?".

And because the plate are less absolutely intense (while still remarkable), it is easier to have a pleasant time, enjoying company and service, and wine. In the Loiseau days, eating there was like attending to a Racine tragedy or a Mahler symphony: wonderful, amazing, moving, but also exhausting, almost too intense, disturbing. You (I at least) really did not feel the need to eat for several days afterwards, full of an almost aesthetic satisfaction.

Edited October 1, 2007 by julot-les-pinceaux (log)

[julot-les-pinceaux]

Ironically, I was just scanning the end of the week papers for the Digest and learned from Friday's Les Echos that Jean-Louis Galesne reviewed places in Beaune, the first of which the the Loiseau company's Loiseau des Vignes that (I believe was planned before his death and) features a winelist of 70 wines (largely Burgundies), ranging in price per glass from 2-45 Euros for 8 or 12 centiliters in a bistrot that is apparently quite successful.

←

They do some Loiseau classics like the oeufs en meurette -- eggs poached in water and a wine sauce made of a reduction of red wine, thickened with carrott puree and buttered.

[julot-les-pinceaux]

I have never dined at any of the Tantes. How was it?

←

The third, last and no longer in existence one was Tante Jeane in the 17th and the four of us found it lacking the ooompf. Its decor and clientele were somewhat between the other two and why it failed, I don't know.

How they are today I don't know; I went to Tante Marguerite after Loiseau's death just to see if they were going to change (what was to me a winning formula) but it was pretty much the same.

←

I have to correct you. The initial Tante Jeanne was boring, it's true, and the location was never really good. But they changed the whole team around two years before it closed, and Jérôme Bonnet became the chef then.

That was little known, but in that time, I think it was the best restaurant in Paris. Jérôme totally had the real Loiseau style, and I ate some of the best dishes of my life there. His foie gras poached in red wine was better than Alléno's, he had a mastering of simple dishes like a plate of seafood and morels or gariguette strawberries on a riz au lait that were positively sublime.

Actually, if there ever was grande cuisine at (expensive) bistrot prices, I think Jérôme Bonnet did it. Nevertheless, clients never came and I gues profitabilty either -- but I was not the only one feeling that way. Jérôme has been a sous-chef at Legendre's for a few months after that, but apparently they did not get along and last time I checked he was sous-chef at the Maison du Danemark.

[John Talbott]

I have never dined at any of the Tantes. How was it?

←

The third, last and no longer in existence one was Tante Jeane in the 17th and the four of us found it lacking the ooompf. Its decor and clientele were somewhat between the other two and why it failed, I don't know.

How they are today I don't know; I went to Tante Marguerite after Loiseau's death just to see if they were going to change (what was to me a winning formula) but it was pretty much the same.

←

I have to correct you. The initial Tante Jeanne was boring, it's true, and the location was never really good. But they changed the whole team around two years before it closed, and Jérôme Bonnet became the chef then.

←

No correction needed; we went just after it opened.